'Might is Right' and 'Might and Right'

Y. Yagama Reddy, P. Kesavulu Reddy and G. Jayachandra Reddy

1

ISSN 0975 – 5942 Vol.V(1), Jan-June 2013, pp.1-17 Visit: http://www.isaps-india.org/APJSS/index.htm © International Society for Asia-Pacific Studies (ISAPS), www.isaps-india.org

Social Darwinism vis-à-vis Aboriginalism: Australia echoing the Notions of ‘Might is Right’ and ‘Might and Right’ Y Yagama Reddy*, P Kesavulu Reddy@ and G. Jayachandra Reddy* *Centre for Southeast Asian & Pacific Studies, Sri Venkateswara University, Tirupati-51702, A.P., India @ Formerly Research Fellow, Dept of Geography (SVU), 565, Balaji Colony, Tirupati-517501, A.P., India Corresponding author: [email protected]

Australia’s Geographical Remoteness and Obscured History Geographical predisposition to the man-land relationship more often than not entailing historical processes connotes “the complementary and interdependent relationship of geography and history” (McInerney 2011) which found its expression in such “fundamentally inseparable” common terms as space and time, area and era, and places and events (Meinig 1987, p. xv). It is all about the knowledge of spatial dimension concerning the historical events that explain the human habits, behaviour and characteristics of a particular culture as being shaped by geographic conditions. A modest attempt is made in this study to elucidate the evolution of indigenous communities in Australia keeping pace with the harsh geographical environment for over several millennia until the isolated continent was infringed by the British settlers. The little-known rather obscured territory of Australia had since then stood at variance with its past and began to contribute a historiography afresh. This is a glaring reality testified by the noted historian Goeffrey Blainey in his book Tyranny of Distance: “The geographical remoteness has been central to shaping our (Australian) history and identity”; and this becomes a strong point from his further remark that, “how could one study Australian history without recognizing the impact of geography on our settlement, governance, national character, military involvement, etc” (Blainey 2001). True, the island–continent of Australia was least known for its history, geography and economy, until and after Captain

Asia Pacific Journal of Social Sciences, Vol.V(1), Jan-June 2013, pp.1-17


2

Cook discovered it in 1770. That Australia fraught with its sheer indifference to geographical location close to the Asian landmass was vindicated by its contempt for its immediate Asian neighbours as much as its self- acclaimed identity as a ‘European cultural outpost’ at the Asia’s tail-end. In fact, there had also been perceptible ignorance of Australia among the students of international studies as well, especially in India even as both these geographically proximate Indian Ocean littorals have many shared values, concerns and interests. Equally held responsible was Australia’s negligence and indifference towards India, despite their Commonwealth connection. It was thus lack of basic knowledge of each other country remained at the base of ‘poverty of communications’; and hence the ‘drift and discard’ attitude which was termed as an anomaly rather a paradox. Thus, like many others, we (the authors of this study) have known ‘all about’ Australia as ‘an island-continent-nation’, a country endowed with ‘vast expansive desert’ pushing its ‘sparse population’, but preponderantly concentrated in the coastal fringes, a land of ‘cricket players’ and a ‘habitat of kangaroos’. For the fault of having been trained in geography at the university level, we have gained some basic understanding of regional geography of Australia. But, never did we gain a proper understanding of Australia’s shared geological history and human geography with India; justifiably, there was no dire need for developing such a comprehensive data base on Australia, leave alone its history, polity and governance. Further, our interest in Australian human geography and historical geography owes much to our (first and third authors) association for over a decade with the Australian studies programme at the university and to the much coveted Australia-India Council Fellowship awarded to us (in 2005 and 2013 respectively) that facilitated our interaction with a crosssection of people throughout Australia (starting with Western Australia, through Queensland, Australian Capital Territory, Victoria, South Australia and New South Wales) and with the scholarly community at various institutes/universities in Australia, besides gaining-first-hand-knowledge of Australian geography, society, polity and governance. The second author had a unique opportunity of staying in Australia for about five years that entitled him to gain deeper insight into various facets of Australia. Travel across the continent nation stimulated interest and inquisitiveness to examine the indigenous communities spreading far and wide the vast territory of Australia in terms of their long-sustained adaptability to the



3

environment where they live in and their struggle for survival in the face of onslaught by the European colonization as well as their resistance to White settlers’ aggrandizement impeding the process of reconciliation to the ground realities. Aborigines, the Indigenous People of Australia? Australian continent carries a unique distinction of having experienced a greater degree of ‘geological quiet’ than any other continent; in other words, Australia has remained physically isolated from the rest of the world's landmasses for over 40 million years. This long period of isolation of Australia has given rise to a unique flora and fauna in the flattest and driest continent of 7.2 million square kilometers of area. The process of settlement in the island– continent, as the prehistory points out, is surmised to have been accomplished much before 40,000 years ago (Pleistocene period). Aborigines, the Latin-derived term, refer to the ‘original inhabitants’; and there are archaeological evidences pointing that the Aboriginal people, whose ancestors arrived on the northwest coast of Australia between 65,000 and 40,000 years ago, would have inhabited Australia for more than 50,000 years. A DNA study strongly confirmed that the “Aboriginal Australians (are) one of the oldest living populations in the world, certainly the oldest outside of Africa” (Australian Geographic Staff 2011). Rosemary van den Berg of Murdoch University, who got her doctorate for her thesis on Aboriginal issues, contended that “Australia was a virtual Eden”, of which the Aboriginals are “the indigenous peoples” (Berg 2006, pp.38-39). Lengthy shoreline of island-continent enabled dozens of groups to make their homes simultaneously without resorting to encroaching on the domains settled by other groups. But for the connectivity with the adjacent landmass of Southeast Asia in the form of exposed land-bridge during the last glaciations period (1520 thousand years ago), the continent Down Under remained in a moribund state that rendered Aborigines to endure biological and cultural isolation. Seclusion became the trait of Australian Aborigines, inasmuch as they were said to have been virtually ignorant of the existence of other groups spreading far and wide in the vast continent of Australia, despite the fact that the Aborigines, composed of 500 groups, represent cultures of some general type and their languages belong to the same linguistic family and one of the longest continuous cultures in existence.



4

Even as these early settlers, in smaller proportions, confined to their respective isolated locations, they emerged as cultural groups with identifiable unity and cultural practices. The indigenous cultures, which remained unchanged for thousands of years, “shaped, and were shaped by, the geography of Australia”. Australian Aborigines survived as a race; and their life style and cultural practices which ‘had endured in an egalitarian society benefited the Aboriginal people.’ The Australian society during the ‘traditional period’ was marked by low densities – ranging from 1 person per 50 km2 in the arid regions to 5 - 10 persons per 2 km2 in the eastern coastal belt. Aborigines, in due course of time, populated the entire continent of Australia developing a subsistence economy (Migration Heritage 2010). Even as more than 60 per cent of the Aborigines are settled in urban areas, there is sizable population still living in the bush and desert or moving across the territory. Aborigines Adaptability to the Environment The bonds of kinship among the local groups sustain the linkages mainly through two operational modes, viz., principles of mutualism (inclusiveness) and particularism (exclusiveness). Their economy never transcended the limits of nomadic life centering on food gathering, hunting (birds and animals), fishing and harvesting edible plants which were carried out as collective enterprises. Yet, there was no sedentary agriculture practised by the Aborigines who were well tuned to the nomadic lifestyle; and, as a consequence, lack of farming was a fine-tuned adaptation to a unique set of environmental problems, rather than a sign of ‘primitiveness’. As they penetrated the diverse regions of the continent their continued survival came to depend upon their ability to exploit the food resources without depleting them; and there are spatial variations in the Aborigines’ land management practices. Evidently, Aborigines “did not own the land and never ploughed the land”; and the lands were held collectively by a group. “To the Aboriginal people the land was, and still is, their Mother and had to be looked after, loved and respected”, observed van den Berg who further added that the Aborigines had much “respect for other’s ownership of the land”. Formal leadership vested with authority bears no significance in a society devoid of conflicts over land-ownership rights, power-sharing and territorial authority. The terrain is not merely a territorial expression, but a spiritual force for the Aboriginal community with unique distinction of ‘homeostasis’.



5

That the aborigines indeed adapt very well is amply testified by the fact that they adapted to, and survived in, some of the world’s harshest environments for survival. Aboriginal stable and efficient way of life was thus the outcome of their adaptation to the unique and harsh Australian environment. These first Australians would have encountered changing climates and different environments; even then, the native settlers never pushed the environment to the verge of environmental degradation. There is also little disagreement over the fact that they had established a remarkable ecological stability for several thousands of years. “The people had inhabited the land for thousands of generations, had endured major climatic changes, yet they were still living well”, observed Beth Gott, an ethnobotanist at the School of Biological Sciences, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia. Beth Gott, who worked with archaeologists in pursuit of compiling data bases of Aboriginals in southeastern Australia, further elaborated Aborigines’ ability to get through the climatic changes: Major climatic changes, such as glacial periods, have produced long-term vegetation changes that flowed slowly over the continent, but despite this, the Aborigines were always faced with the same survival challenge. Their long history in Australia is evidence that they surmounted the challenge (Gott 2005). Though they are termed as ‘unchanging people in an unchanging land’, Aborigines are at the same time considered as ‘intellectual aristocrats’ among early peoples. The totality of Aboriginal culture include sophisticated religion, art and social organization, an egalitarian system of justice and decision-making, complex far-reaching trading networks. Their deep sense of responsibility in land management practices richly deserves appreciation. Their close identification with the land enabled “Australia’s indigenous people to manage their environment in a way that enabled them to survive and prosper on this most difficult continent” (Gott 2005, pp.1203-1208). Obviously, the environment affected traditional beliefs and cultural practices of the indigenous communities in Australia.” Aboriginal Australian cultures often had strong spiritual relationships with the local environment. They developed myths to explain the landscape as, for instance, the Australian coastline was once (implicitly a reference to the last



6

glacial period) closer to the Great Barrier Reef. Modern scientific research has proven that many of these myths are fairly accurate historic records (Education National Geographic, n.d.). ‘Mental maps’, a unique system for signposting and marking the land, are obviously interconnected with the Dreaming and Spirit Ancestors – a concept that connotes a complex meaning about the existence of custom as law of life. Indigenous seasonal knowledge, rather a type of traditional ecological knowledge, of the Aborigines has been in large measure contributed to natural resource management, as could be discernible from the Aboriginal seasonal descriptions and calendars. Potential application of their knowledge, especially about fire management, water management and climate change monitoring, has become effective through cross-cultural communications; and hence the Aboriginal natural resource management has been predisposed to spatial and socio-ecological outcomes (Prober, O’Conner and Walsh 2011). Aborigines amply demonstrated that they got adapted very well to the world’s harshest environment. Australia: Dual Status of the Colonized and the Colonizer Captain Cook’s idealistic image of native people as ‘noble savages’ and uncontaminated by the evils of civilization was so much modified after 1788 as to depict the Aborigines as ‘ignoble’ savages and barbarous heathens (Mulvaney 1990, p.10). The year 1788 marked the beginning of great suffering and loss for Aboriginal people – the invasion of their land. The European colonists failed to understand the society and land ownership system of the native people, known as Aborigines, meaning that ‘the people who were here from the beginning’. Instead, Australia began to be colonized by the Whites by applying the legal doctrine of ‘terra nullius’ (land of no one) to the terra australis. Simply, White settlers hardly understood the Aboriginal culture and their ignorance intolerance took the form of brutal killing of the Aboriginal people; and their attempts at breeding out White culture through assimilation led to the ignominious act of Stolen Generation. Indigenous population displays greater levels of social and economic disadvantage than the non-Indigenous population, in terms of wages, employment, housing, health services and education (skwirk.com.au). A 2011 Survey is reported to have confirmed that racial discrimination continues to exist and racism exists at all levels of Australian society” (Korff 2013).



7

For Aborigines who made sense of the events that had happened in the past 200 years of European colonization, Australia’s Bicentenary was a time of mourning -- perhaps a celebration of the survival of Aboriginal people -- but not “a celebration of a nation” (Hemming 1994, pp. 16-37). With the Aboriginal system coming into contact with European law what was claimed to be superior to the former, Australia became a territory with ‘Two Laws’ or ‘dual status of the colonized as well as the colonizer.’ This inevitable conflict that led to the prospect of extinction of native people was justified by the application of the concept of the “survival of the fittest’ to the human race, a notion what came to be popularly known as Social Darwinism. The Britishers’ invasion of the Aboriginal territory bears testimony to Ratzel’s Lebensraum that subscribed to the notion of ‘might is right’, as if superior races are destined to subjugate the weaker people. Converse is also true that it was a relentless struggle between the ‘might and right’, with the Aborigines demanding social justice and equality. Notwithstanding the blurred image of White historiography, it was certain that historical momentum relegated the native people to minority status in their own land. Indigenous Australians were dispossessed of their land, despised for their culture, and marginalized, abused, and murdered. The most ill-famed policy of White Australia towards native people was forcible separation of the Aboriginal Children from their parents what has been discredited as the ‘Stolen Generations’. This deliberate inhuman act of the Australian government was nothing more than the hostile attitude towards Aborigines and its protracted opposition and callous attitude to the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. Aboriginal population suffered phenomenal decline from an estimated figure of 1.0 million (when the Britishers arrived in the late18th Century) to 31,000 at the turn of the 20th Century (Horton 1994), and reportedly to a minuscule of 20,000 by 1900 (Maddock 1975). Evidently, this was the logical corollary of the Social Darwinism implicitly prophesied by White settlers; but these figures are definitely at variance with those of the official estimates of 2011, quoted by an independent agency, Creative Spirits, which the Australian National Library has considered as “an important component of the national documentary heritage" (Korff 2013). The Aboriginal population, according to the 2011 estimates of the



8

Australian Bureau of Statistics, declined from 700,000 in 1788 to 93,000 in 1900, a decrease by almost 87 per cent. With a population of 670,000 in 2011, Aborigines constitute 3.0 per cent of the Australia’s total population (ABS 2012). It is no wonder that the population figures of Aborigines were only based on the estimates made by various governmental agencies, until the repeal in 1967 of section 127 of the Commonwealth Constitution Act by amending S 51(xxvi) of the Constitution. Thus, the 1971 Census provided the first ever account of accurate population size of Aboriginals (122,000); and the Commonwealth Government has since then endeavoured to explain the phenomenal increase in the Aboriginal population to 171,000 by 1981, 265,000 in 1991 and then to 460,000 in 2001 (ABS 1971,1991 and 2001; Price 1987). Aboriginalism, Struggle for Sovereignty British colonizers embarked on the scheme of ‘Acclimatization of Societies’ in pursuit of remaking the Australian landscape into a version of Britain which was nothing but domestication of plant and animal species, including the White people. But, it took long time for the White settlers to realize that their transplantation proved to be a cultural maladaptation to the environment. In the process, Aborigines have endured a tense relationship with their home country. Aboriginalism, reminiscent of a political movement, is an expression of resistance against discrimination and injustice to which Aboriginals had been subjected. Aboriginals’ fight, both in political and legal arenas, was destined for the restoration of rights in their own land enduring an apartheid system under the Whiteman’s rule. The battle between the Aborigines struggling for sovereignty (separatism) and White Australians advocating assimilation portrays their respective viewpoints all through the ‘historical period’, especially from the dawn of Commonwealth of Australia in 1901. There had been Aboriginal demands for recognition of their particular status and restitution for past wrongs. There were a spate of debates on Aboriginal issues encompassing civil rights, equality, parliamentary representation, land claims and autonomy. The Constitutional Alteration (Aboriginal) Act May 1967, assented in August as Constitutional Reform Bill, enabled Aborigines to be counted in Census and to vote in federal and state elections, besides federal government assuming a concurrent power with state governments to legislate the Aboriginal affairs. There are Special Aboriginal assistance Programmes (SAAP) encompassing a gamut of



9

areas like arts, environment, health, community services and communications, apart from the mainstream programmes of employment, education and housing (Altman and Sanders 1991). It was about the same time in January 1972 that the Aboriginal Tent Embassy was erected on the lawns of Old Parliament House. The Tent Embassy, a symbol of black power, became a rallying point for the campaigns of Federal Council for Australian Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders (FCAATSI) along with other Aboriginal organizations drawing attention to the claims for land rights and social justice of Aboriginals. Chronology of Aborigines-demand for land rights and self-determination (see Annexure) bears a testimony to the relentless struggle against discrimination and subjugation on their own land. Of much relevance to this context was the first-hand account of the authors who gained deeper insight into the state of affairs of Aborigines in different part of Australia. Watching the Aboriginesmoments, reactions and responses on various occasions and interaction with some Aborigines in different walks of life at different places had really been exhilarating and thought-provoking. At an open-air debate in Perth, a well-informed Aboriginal youth was vehemently turning down the claims of White-Australian of the benefits being extended to the Aborigines under various welfare and developmental programmes. In Brisbane, the Aborigines attributed their miserable living conditions to the onslaught of White-settlers. At the Tent-embassy in Canberra, an Aborigine demanded selfdetermination on the lines of territorial sovereignty and independence that was tantamount to the eviction of White-settlers from Australia. If it were to be the case, she was questioned, all the people who entered into India as a sequel of Moghul invasions need to be driven out of India! The oblique reply was a stark reminder that the Whitesettlers in Australia had resorted to wiping out the entire indigenous community and subjugating the natives through inhumane exploitative acts and measures. The pitiable contention was nothing but rolling back the Australian history of 200 years since the British colonization. At Canberra, Melbourne and Sydney, the Aboriginal youth acknowledged the benefits of education and employment and thereby assured living conditions on account of Australian government policies, even as being critical of loss of lineage-links due to the malady Stolen Generation. Contrary to the deeply entrenched Aborigines-feeling of being exploited and exterminated


10


by the Whites, there are Australians who admit the racial discrimination towards the indigenous people, as can be gleaned from the Table given below: Table: Varied Responses on Racism in Australia (extracted from: Korff 2013). Expressed Opinion

Percentage

Australians who agree that there is racial prejudice in Australia Australians who agree that something should be done to fight racism in Australia Aboriginal people who experience racism in their everyday lives Australians who think they are a "casual racist" but refuse to change Believing that Australians with a British background enjoy a privileged position Australians who agree that "Australia is weakened by people of different ethnic origins sticking to their old ways Australians with anti-Indigenous concerns Australians opposing multiculturalism in the urban fringes where most overseas arrivals settle first Are Australians Racist (out of 2551 votes)

87 86 75 44 42 41 26 20 77

Evidently, there are still vestiges of opposition to the multiculturalism entrenched in the minds of White Australian community, even as the Australian government has time and again proudly advocating multiculturalism as being the corner stone of Australian society. That the racism is “only hidden behind a friendly mask” is well-discernible from the following opinions expressed by people in different strata (Korff 2013): I do not accept that there is underlying racism in this country. —John Howard, Prime Minister of Australia (1996-2007) in 2005 I do not believe that racism is at work in Australia. —Kevin Rudd, Prime Minister of Australia (2007-2010) in 2010 Racism is still alive and evil in this country, I can assure you. —Colin Markham, former NSW parliamentary secretary for Indigenous affairs



11

We all know that racism is alive and well. —Aboriginal Reverend Aunty Alex Gater You don't have to scratch the surface too hard in this country to find an awful underbelly of racism. —Linda Burney, NSW Deputy Opposition Leader. Prime Minister Kevin Rudd in the Australian Parliament on 13 February 2010 tendered the apology aimed at the Stolen Generations of more than 50,000 Aboriginal children forcibly removed from their parents and raised by white families in an effort to wipe out their culture. While admitting “the hurt, the humiliation, the degradation and the sheer brutality of the act of physically separating a mother from her children (as) a deep assault on our senses and on our most elemental humanity”, Rudd underscored that the “decency, human decency, universal human decency, demands that the nation now step forward to right an historical wrong”, in order to “remove a great stain from the nation's soul and in the true spirit of reconciliation to open a new chapter in the history of this great land Australia'' (News.com.au 2008; Parliament of Australia 2008). His reconciliatory proposal acknowledges the need to construct a platform that provides real opportunities for Aboriginal advancement: in short, nothing less than the realization of the sovereign rights of Aborigines as unique and distinct peoples. The federal government’s current policy of "practical reconciliation" involves working toward better outcomes for Aborigines in health, education, employment, and so on. Reconciliation therefore implies internal self-determination. About the same time, Aborigines more often than not argue that “only when there is respect and recognition for the sanctity of the Dreaming, or traditional Aboriginal religion, will there be any possibility of a rapprochement between `black' and `white' Australians” (McIntoshlan 2010). And in places such as the Northern Territory, Aboriginal oral history and sacred tradition are accepted as evidence in land claim court hearings - an important first step in this process. Towards shared Understanding of Australian History For all the unilateral contention of the colonial masters that the land belonged to none, Aborigines were the true dwellers on the



12

land, inasmuch as they have maintained traditional law and links with the land. But, historical momentum relegated the native Aboriginal community to a minority status in their own territory which evolved onto the stage of a multi-cultural society, albeit with the predominance of European White people. There had been some important milestones testifying to the Whiteman’s response to the relentless Aborigines’ fight for land rights. Though the arguments had been deeper, both the sides seem to have tuned to the reality that ‘more than one people or nation’ must share this continent, in a simple sense underscoring the key concept of ‘nation for a continent and continent for a nation’. Aboriginalism made the White settlers to “move towards a shared understanding of Australian history”, by way of respecting and recognizing the Aboriginal perspectives of history (Hemming 1994, pp.25 and 32). Worth-mentioning are the Aboriginal artifacts and paintings that flooded a wide range of shopping malls and filed the galleries of museums at various levels across the nation, besides the centres of Aboriginal studies in almost all the Australian University. Though these are not expected to assuage the wounds of the Aborigines, nor would they be construed as strategy of White Australia in pursuit of atoning its past mistakes and projecting its image of cultural-inclusiveness. But, they serve to indicate the acts of federal government as having reconciled to the existence of Aboriginal society and culture long before the White rule. Undeniably, the Aboriginal communities had become sensitive to the British colonization which shattered their traditions, laws and sense of belonging to the land. As history traveled from the state of ‘communication of silence’ owing to cultural and language barriers to that of ‘cross-cultural communication,’ the Aboriginal-related issues have begun to receive a fair amount of attention, unlike in the past. The concept of ‘nation for a continent and continent for a nation’ shall only be realized, if the White protagonists take into cognizance of the history of Aboriginal settlement for over thousands of years far and wide of the island-continent, and the Aborigines desist from the hopes of rolling back the history of last 200 years of British settlement in Australia (Yagama Reddy 2009). Let’s hope Australia would become a land of reconciled peoples befitting its oftrepeated phrase of multi-ethnic and multi-cultural society.



13

References Cited ABS (Australian Bureau of Statistics), 1971, 1991 and 2001 Census, Canberra. ABS, 2012, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Population Estimates, 2011 - Preliminary, Australian Bureau of Statistics, 12/2012 Altman, J.C. and W. Sanders, 1991, From Exclusion to Dependence, Aborigines and the Welfare State in Australia, Discussion Paper 1/1991, (Centre for Aboriginal Economic Policy Research, Australian National University: Canberra), quoting the Annual Reports of Department of Aboriginal Affairs. Australian Geographic Staff, 2011, Aboriginal Australians the Oldest Culture on the Earth, Australiangeographic.com.au, 23 September. Berg, Rosemary van den, 2006, “Aboriginality: The Australian Enigma”, in Santhosh Sareen (ed.), Australia and India Interconnections: Identity, Representation, Belonging, (Mantra Books: New Delhi). Blainey, Goeffrey, 2001, The Tyranny of Distance: How Distance Shaped Australia's History, Pan Macmillan Publishing Services: South Yerra, Victoria, Australia), 413p. (First published in 1966: SunBooks, Melbourne, Victoria). Education National Geographic, Australia and Oceania: Human Geography, Culture and Politics Gott, Beth, 2005, “Aboriginal fire management in Southeastern Australia: Aims and Frequency”, Journal of Biogeography, vol. 32 (Blackwell Publishing Ltd). Hemming, Steve, 1994, “Changing History: New Images of Aboriginal History,” in Colin Bourke, Eleanor Bourke and Bill Edwards (eds.), Aboriginal Australia: An Introductory Reader in Aboriginal Studies, (University of Queensland Press: Brisbane). Horton, D (ed.), 1994, Encyclopaedia of Aboriginal Australia, Vol. 2, (Aboriginal Studies Press: Canberra). Kaplan, Robert D., 2010, South Asia’s Geography of Conflict, (Center for a New American Security: Washington). Korff, Jens, 2013, “Racial discrimination in Australia”, Creative Spirits, 6 September 2013, http://www.creativespirits.info/aboriginalculture/people/racialdiscrimination-in- australia (Accessed 20 September 2013). Maddock, K., 1975, The Australian Aborigines, (Ringwood: Pelican). McInerney, Malcolm, 2011, “Entwining history and geography”, Spatialworlds, 27 April. McIntoshIan S., 2010, Visions of the Future: The Prospect for Reconciliation, 2 April 2010,



14

http://www.culturalsurvival.org/ourpublications/csq/article/visionsfuture-prospect reconciliation#sthash.EynZgXHM.dpuf (Accessed 9 August 2013) Meinig, Donald, 1987, The Shaping of America: A Geographical Perspective on 500 Years of American History, (Yale University Press: New Haven). Migration Heritage, 2010, Australia 50000 Years before Present, (Government of Australia, NSW Migration Heritage Centre: Sydney) Mulvaney, D.J., 1990, “The Australian Aborigines 1600-1929: Opinion and Fieldwork,” in S. Janson and S. MacIntyre (ed.), Through White Eyes, (Allen and Unwin: Sydney). News.com.au, 2008, Kevin Rudd's national apology to Stolen Generations, 13 February 2008, http://www.news.com.au/national-news/pmmoves-to-heal-the-nation/story-e6frfkw9-1111115539560 (Accessed 30 September 2012) Parliament of Australia, 2008, Apology to Australia's Indigenous peoples, Department of Parliamentary Services, Canberra, 13 February 2008. Price, C., 1987, “Immigration and Ethnic Origin”, in Vamplew, W. (ed.), Australian and Historical Statistics, (Fairfax, Syme & Weldon: Sydney). Prober, Suzanne M., O'Connor, Michael H. and Walsh, Fiona J., 2011, Australian Aboriginal Peoples’ Seasonal Knowledge: a Potential Basis for Shared Understanding in Environmental Management, Ecology and Society 16 (2): 12. skwirk.com.au, The Indigenous Population, http://www.skwirk.com.au/pc_s-16_u-123_t-335_c-1156/nsw/geography/changing-australiancommunities/australia-s-unique-human-characteristics/theindigenous-population Yagama Reddy, Y., 2009, “Towards Empowerment of Aboriginal People in Australia”, in A. Ranga Reddy (ed.), Ethics and Environment, (Mittal Publications: New Delhi), pp. 339-350.



15

Annexure: Landmarks in the History of Aboriginal Land Rights 1869: The first 'protective' legislation, passed in Victoria, provided a model for other states, and led to the beginning of a new wave of moving Aboriginal people away from their own country and onto reserves, almost a century since British arrival in 1788. 1905-1920s: The Aboriginal people on a large scale were moved to other Reserves, in pursuance of the 1905 Closer Settlement Act. But some of these reserves were later revoked for a Soldiers Settlement Scheme which constituted a 'second wave' of dispossession. 1925: The Aboriginal Protection League (APL) was founded by Colonel Joseph Charles Genders of South Australia and The Australian Aborigines Progressive Association (AAPA) in New South Wales by Fredrick G. Maryland with the aim of acquiring free hold land for the aboriginal people. 1929: Bleaky Report favoured the establishment of ‘reserves’ for traditional owners, instead of self-government for Aboriginals. 1930s: The ideals of APL and the movement for equal rights and sovereignty were revived by an Aboriginal activist, William Cooper, who argued that the Aboriginals were the first comers to Australia. 1936: The amended New South Wales Aborigines Protection Act gave a new definition to the Aborigines that could facilitate easy movement of Aborigines. 1937: A new Aborigines Progressive Association (APA), founded by Bill Ferguson, argued for Aboriginal equality and full representation of Aboriginals in Aboriginal Protection Board (APB). 1938: Australian Day (26 January 1938) was observed as a ‘Day of Mourning’ by Cooper and Ferguson. 1939: Aboriginal Protection Board (APB) was replaced by Aboriginal Welfare Board (AWB). 1940-1943: Further amendments to the New South Wales Aborigines Protection Act made the children removal easier. 1944: Commonwealth Attorney General, Dr. Herbert Evatt, favoured an act of transferring powers (including control of Aboriginal people) from states to the Federal Government. 1946: Cattlemen strike led by Whiteman, Don McLead and two Aborigines. 1947: Melbourne-based Australian Aboriginal League (AAL), founded by Bill Cooper, became an inter-state committee. 1948: Bill Ferguson was the first Aboriginal to contest in the federal elections (from Lawson) with an intention to mount pressure on federal government for Aboriginal civil rights.



16

1956: Aboriginal Australian Fellowship (AAF), a forum for both aboriginal and non-aboriginal people on a footing of equality, was founded by Pearl Gibbs, an ardent supporter of Ferguson. 1957: Gordon Bryant, Labour Party MP, initiated full debate on Aboriginal affairs in the parliament, while Leslie Heylen, MP, in a petition sought amendments to the constitution for the redressal of Aboriginal difficulties. 1958: Charles Duguid who organized federal conference in February at Adelaide adopted an inclusive definition for all Aborigines. The newly elected Federal Council for Aboriginal Advancement (FCAA) with Duguid as President urged a constitutional referendum to abolish the discriminatory clauses against Aborigines. 1960-61: FCAA questioned the rationale behind the policy of assimilation of Aboriginal people. FCAA’s agitations forced Canberra to constitute a House of Representatives Special Committee on Voting Rights to the Aboriginal people. 1965: FCAAA was transformed into Federal Council for Australian Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders (FCAATSI). It got succeeded in its efforts to fix minimum wages to Aboriginal stockmen in cattle farms. 1966: Federal Parliamentary Select Committee recommended compensation to Aborigines at Yirrkala reserve in the Northern Territory. This act testifies to the recognition of Aboriginal land claims. 1967: FCAATSI campaign led the Australians to vote overwhelmingly for the constitutional reform, which entailed the Constitutional Reform Bill that offered, among various other matters, voting rights to the Aboriginal people. 1969: FCAATSI’s signature campaign for Aboriginal land rights. Aborigines Welfare Board was dissolved. Reserve lands were given over to the Aboriginal Lands Trust, with Aboriginal membership. 1970: Supreme Court of Northern territory in Yirrkala case ruled that Australian law did not recognize Aboriginal title to the land. 1972: Commonwealth policy adopted by McMahon Government conferred on the Aborigines many sops except the land rights. Aboriginal Tent Embassy, erected on the lawns of Old Parliament House on 26 January 1972, became the symbol of Black Power. 1974: Commonwealth Aboriginal Land Fund Act was passed. 1975: Though the Federal government officially implemented its decision (of mid-1960s) to restore control over 26 sq. km of land at



17

Wattie Creek to the Gurindji Aboriginal people of Northern Territory, through Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act (1976). 1983: New South Wales Aboriginal Land Rights Act was passed; but the accompanying Bill retrospectively validated revocations of reserve lands. 1985: Protests over the Federal Labour Government's National Land Rights became the Preferred Model. 1992: The High Court of Australia handed down a judgement in Mabo case that recognized the existence of land rights of Aboriginal people prior to the occupation of the continent by the British. 1993: The Federal Government legislated the Native Title Act allowing native people to claim their traditional lands. This Act strikes a balance between the interests of Aboriginal people and those of the legitimate land holders. 1996: The High Court of Australia's Wik Judgement recognized that Pastoral Leases and Native Title could co-exist but Pastoral Rights prevailed. 1997: The Federal government attempted to pass the Native Title Amendment Bill; but the amendments suggested by the Senate were refused by the House of Representatives.


'Might is Right' and 'Might and Right'

'Might is Right' and 'Might and Right'

Suggest Documents

MILITARY MIGHT VERSUS SOVEREIGN RIGHT - UNAM

The Common Law and Economic Growth: Hayek Might Be Right

The Common Law and Economic Growth: Hayek Might Be Right

Right-sided rhabdoid colorectal tumors might be related to ... - CiteSeerX

VaoP~]] Download 'Democracy's Might; Democracy's Right- Book 2'

6 Patient Education Mistakes You Might Be Making - Right Source ...

6 Patient Education Mistakes You Might Be Making - Right Source ...

Emotional and Behavioural Difficulties MIGHT IS ...

Scientific Review of Mountain Might - Mountain Might, Altitude Training ...

You Might Not

Doomed-might

CFA paradox - Matt Might

How Might We - Squarespace

U100 might mean ' - Radiotapes.com

How Might U - Papers.ssrn.com

CFA paradox - Matt Might

MegaCAD-Might Need Somebody.PRT

Matt Might matt.might.net

Might and Magic III Manual - Abandonia

May and Might Worksheet - English for Everyone

Our best shot at cooling the planet might be right ...

e-Business IS RIGHT

is right for oregon

Is Einstein Still Right?