Australia to apologize for Aborigines' pain

cloudy

Alabama Slammer
Joined
Mar 23, 2004
Posts
37,997
hey, its a start.

From what I've read, as bad as natives had it here, the Australian Aborigines had it worse.

Australia to apologize for Aborigines' pain

The Australian government said Tuesday that it will apologize for years of "mistreatment" that have inflicted "profound grief, suffering and loss" on the country's Aboriginal people.
art.ruddhouse.ap.jpg

Prime Minister Kevin Rudd and Ngunnawal elder Matilda House speak in Parliament in Canberra Tuesday.
Click to view previous image

Prime Minister Kevin Rudd introduced a motion in parliament on Tuesday that contains the apology. Lawmakers plan to vote on it Wednesday, and it's expected to pass unanimously, said a spokeswoman for Jenny Macklin, the minister for Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs.

"We apologize for the laws and policies of successive parliaments and governments that have inflicted profound grief, suffering and loss on these our fellow Australians," the proposed apology reads.

The apology deals in particular with generations of indigenous children who were taken from their families by the government. Those children became known as the "Stolen Generations."

"For the pain, suffering and hurt of these Stolen Generations, their descendants and for the families left behind, we say sorry," the text reads.

"To the mothers and the fathers, the brothers and the sisters, for the breaking up of families and communities, we say sorry. And for the indignity and degradation thus inflicted on a proud people and a proud culture, we say sorry."

For 60 years, until 1970, the Australian government took mixed-race Aboriginal children from their families and put them in dormitories or industrial schools, claiming it was protecting them. As a result of the policy, "stolen" children lost contact with their families and heritage, received poor education, lived in harsh conditions, and often endured abuse.

The policy was largely a secret until a decade ago, when a government inquiry and high-profile movie exposed it. That sparked a mass movement, supported by many white Australians, demanding an apology.

Former Prime Minister John Howard refused to offer an apology, saying the current generation should not be held accountable for past misdeeds. He instead issued a statement of regret.

Rudd, who defeated Howard last November, made an apology part of his election campaign.

"The apology ... is ... very much just the first step," Macklin's spokeswoman said in the capital of Canberra. "We have serious inequalities between indigenous and nonindigenous Australians. The apology is symbolic, but there's a lot of hard work to be done to reverse those inequalities."

Mary Farrell-Hooker counts herself among the Stolen Generations and is now a spokeswoman for an Aboriginal activist group.

She is of mixed race and was one of 12 children of alcoholic parents. Her father was in jail for raping her sister when her mother was hospitalized after a suicide attempt.

"The police came to the school and told me they were taking me to the hospital to see my mom," Farrell-Hooker told CNN. "We never went to the hospital."

Instead, Mary, then 12, was taken to a series of foster centers. At one of them, she said, she was repeatedly raped by a white "house father."

"He would actually come into the room and force himself onto me, rape me, molest me," she said. "If I didn't do what he wanted, he would threaten to do the same to my sister and (threaten to) split us up."

Her parents came to find her, she said, but were repeatedly turned away. She tried to run away but said the police always returned her to her tormentor.

Aboriginal people have been waiting decades for an apology, and the Australian public appear to welcome the government's move, according to CNN's Jacqueline Head in Sydney.

Head said many Australians believe saying sorry is long overdue, but some doubts remain over what it will achieve in the long term -- whether it will help open doors for Aboriginal people seeking rights and compensation or whether it will fail to secure indigenous people a better future.

Some white Australians don't believe the apology will bring about reconciliation.

"I think Australians will be sorry for many generations for offering this apology now," said Piers Akerman, a conservative commentator.

He said Aboriginal compensation claims will now gain new vigor.

To symbolize what the government hopes will be a fresh approach to the future, a group of indigenous Australians performed a traditional welcome ceremony Tuesday of dancing and singing to mark the start of parliament's new session. As the traditional owners of the land which parliament sits on, the performers "welcomed" the lawmakers onto it.

"For thousands of years, our peoples have observed this protocol," said Matilda House, an Aboriginal elder at the ceremony. "It is a good and honest and decent and very human act to reach out to make sure everyone has a place and is welcome."

Rudd said the apology was "part of the healing of the nation" and was meant to turn a new page in the country's history. It notes a painful past and resolves to give equal rights and opportunities to every Australian.

Macklin's spokeswoman said the apology is not intended to impose guilt or attribute blame.

"We just see it as acknowledging the injustices of the past," she said. "We say we can't deny the past, but we can learn from it."
 
Good for them. :)

Nice to get some good news for a change.

Now it's gotta be done here.
 
About time, too long a stain.











Now if the Aussies could just apologise for keep beating us at cricket...
 
Does this mean they will officially be "Native Austrailians" rather than the degrading term they've been hung with for two hundred years?

"Aborigines" tends to mean they just climbed down from the trees, for shit sake.
 
good in theory,

but let's see if any actions match the talk.

up before the judge, the thief offers the victim a statement of remorse, "hey buddy, i'm sorry i took your wallet and spent $300 on booze and broads. i'm profoundly regret the upset it caused." and the sentence of one month in jail is reducted to time served. the $300? well, it just vanished.
 
They had it worse?

Wow.

Worse than when British troops in New England gave a 'gift' of smallpox-infected blankets?

`
 
I'm all for rewriting the history of what happened and making declarations of what was wrong in today's light and making sure that it isn't going on now--but apologizing for something I didn't do (and that was done in an entirely different social climate than I'm living in) and just throwing money at people who also weren't around when it happened? Sorry, no. If it's still happening to any degree, stop that now and declare it's wrong. Apologize to someone today and make them rich for something neither I nor they were invovled in? No. And I'm not just reacting to the Australian aborigine issue.
 
They had it worse?

Wow.

Worse than when British troops in New England gave a 'gift' of smallpox-infected blankets?

`

Yes.

In Tasmania aborigines were hunted and killed like foxes.

There are no Tasmanian aborigines left from the population that existed when Tasmania was "settled".

Og
 
They had it worse?

Wow.

Worse than when British troops in New England gave a 'gift' of smallpox-infected blankets?

`
In the 1870's nearly half of the Natives died of smallpox and other European deseases. They were dispossed, their land stolen and large segments of the population were exterminated with governement approval.

It wasn't until 1960 that the Native People were even recognized in Australia, She. They had it pretty bad.
 
I'm all for rewriting the history of what happened and making declarations of what was wrong in today's light and making sure that it isn't going on now--but apologizing for something I didn't do (and that was done in an entirely different social climate than I'm living in) and just throwing money at people who also weren't around when it happened? Sorry, no. If it's still happening to any degree, stop that now and declare it's wrong. Apologize to someone today and make them rich for something neither I nor they were invovled in? No. And I'm not just reacting to the Australian aborigine issue.

I agree with you to some extent but the treatment of some peoples is still unfair and unjust. An apology is just a form of words. Throwing money at people isn't the answer. Making it possible for minorities to have opportunities and to be respected for their different culture is better.

It needs decades of work to correct the mistakes of the past.

Og
 
I agree with you to some extent but the treatment of some peoples is still unfair and unjust. An apology is just a form of words. Throwing money at people isn't the answer. Making it possible for minorities to have opportunities and to be respected for their different culture is better.

It needs decades of work to correct the mistakes of the past.

Og


Agree with all that--and thats pretty much what I posted, I think (which makes me wonder what part of what I posted you disagree with).
 
In the 1870's nearly half of the Natives died of smallpox and other European deseases. They were dispossed, their land stolen and large segments of the population were exterminated with governement approval.

It wasn't until 1960 that the Native People were even recognized in Australia, She. They had it pretty bad.


On that "population exterminated" bit, last year I edited an interesting book on the Native American population of the state of Virginia. By the calculations these folks made (the book was a combined effort of various public and private museums in the state), there are more Native Americans of indigenous Virginian tribes alive and kicking in Virginia now than there were when the English arrived in Jamestown.
 
On that "population exterminated" bit, last year I edited an interesting book on the Native American population of the state of Virginia. By the calculations these folks made (the book was a combined effort of various public and private museums in the state), there are more Native Americans of indigenous Virginian tribes alive and kicking in Virginia now than there were when the English arrived in Jamestown.

The population prior to the arrival of the Europeans was a number approaching 750,000. By 1900 there were fewer than 150,000. Today there are about 455,000.

But those numbers don't really show the real impact on the native Australians. There culture and way of life has all but disappeared. Those who survived the extermination of the 1870's gave up the wandering life and became "westernized" to live in urban ghettos, doing minimal labor as underpaid ranch hands to survive. Essentually, the Native Aboriginie does not exist anymore, only his perverted decendants.
 
Jenny

On behalf of my Indian ancestors. Pish Posh.

European civilization was the best thing that could have happened to them. Many Indians believed their forest dwelling cousins were imbeciles. Who in hell wants to live in a hut and chase Bambi through the woods when you can live in a nice house and eat beef, pork, poultry, & mutton conveniently parked out in the backyard?

Thank you! Christopher Columbus!
 
The population prior to the arrival of the Europeans was a number approaching 750,000. By 1900 there were fewer than 150,000. Today there are about 455,000.

But those numbers don't really show the real impact on the native Australians. There culture and way of life has all but disappeared. Those who survived the extermination of the 1870's gave up the wandering life and became "westernized" to live in urban ghettos, doing minimal labor as underpaid ranch hands to survive. Essentually, the Native Aboriginie does not exist anymore, only his perverted decendants.


Everyone who exists today is a perversion of their ancestors, aren't they?

Your numbers, although certainly illustrating a serious problem, are closer to decimation than extermination. Writers being careful/precise with wording and all that--especially since gross exaggeration waters down the argument.

We seem to be going through a series here of responding to American issues with Australian issues with American issues. Ain't the Internet great, or what?
 
I'm all for rewriting the history of what happened and making declarations of what was wrong in today's light and making sure that it isn't going on now--but apologizing for something I didn't do (and that was done in an entirely different social climate than I'm living in) and just throwing money at people who also weren't around when it happened? Sorry, no. If it's still happening to any degree, stop that now and declare it's wrong. Apologize to someone today and make them rich for something neither I nor they were invovled in? No. And I'm not just reacting to the Australian aborigine issue.

I was shocked to learn (via the BBC) that the policy of offering white Europeans ten-pound fares to Australia to come settle the coastal areas and keep them white extended into the 1970's and 80's. I believe they gave the date of the last fares as 1982. It seems to me that living people can certainly express some remorse for that policy, at least.
 
I remember from my time in Oz (1965-1969)that 'Abos' were considered as 2nd class citizens. We didn't associate with them, it wasn't the done thing. From what I remember, the Aborigines I did see tended to do nothing and get drunk.
It was a bit of a shock when Evonne Goolagong came along and entered Wimbledon.

But, I was just a young kid at the time, living in a white, middle-class society. I suppose we were segregated as much as them, but didn't realise it. (it was 'us and them', back then)

I presume that it was similar to the Southern US states of the 1960's.
 
I was shocked to learn (via the BBC) that the policy of offering white Europeans ten-pound fares to Australia to come settle the coastal areas and keep them white extended into the 1970's and 80's. I believe they gave the date of the last fares as 1982. It seems to me that living people can certainly express some remorse for that policy, at least.

Aren't remorse and an apology two different things? I suggested a declaration of wrongdoing, which can be just dripping with remorse--and an end to it. And didn't you dig a little deep for this? 1982 and 2008 are worlds apart in terms of social consciousness of the time.
 
Agree with all that--and thats pretty much what I posted, I think (which makes me wonder what part of what I posted you disagree with).

Personally, I'd disagree with the refusal to make an apology. If I recall correctly from the article, the apology was from the Australian government - the entity that, in its various incarnations, enacted and supported those policies. I think's it's appropriate and helpful for the institution as a whole to state its recognition of the wrong done under it in the past and to demonstate a committment to a different future.

As for me personally, my ancestors didn't come to America until the mid-1900's. However, to the extent that I consider myself an American and embrace the values of the country, I feel that I also must recognize that wrong we've done in the past. I love living in a democracy, but I think that part of the bargain in having elected officials is accepting that your country's actions reflect the general will of the people, and not letting "I didn't personally do that, so I have no part in it" become too easy of a fallback. It costs me nothing to express my sorrow and repudiation of the way in which Native Americans and many other ethnic groups have historically been treated, and I'd far rather err on the side of generosity.
 
Personally, I'd disagree with the refusal to make an apology. If I recall correctly from the article, the apology was from the Australian government - the entity that, in its various incarnations, enacted and supported those policies. I think's it's appropriate and helpful for the institution as a whole to state its recognition of the wrong done under it in the past and to demonstate a committment to a different future.

As for me personally, my ancestors didn't come to America until the mid-1900's. However, to the extent that I consider myself an American and embrace the values of the country, I feel that I also must recognize that wrong we've done in the past. I love living in a democracy, but I think that part of the bargain in having elected officials is accepting that your country's actions reflect the general will of the people, and not letting "I didn't personally do that, so I have no part in it" become too easy of a fallback. It costs me nothing to express my sorrow and repudiation of the way in which Native Americans and many other ethnic groups have historically been treated, and I'd far rather err on the side of generosity.

That's fine. Different perspectives. I think the issues need to be (logically) redressed. I think apologizing to someone who wasn't involved by someone who wasn't involved is a bastardization of the word "apologize" and a manipulative guilt trip. But that's just me.
 
Everyone who exists today is a perversion of their ancestors, aren't they?

Your numbers, although certainly illustrating a serious problem, are closer to decimation than extermination. Writers being careful/precise with wording and all that--especially since gross exaggeration waters down the argument.

We seem to be going through a series here of responding to American issues with Australian issues with American issues. Ain't the Internet great, or what?

Everyone living on earth is a pervesion of their ancestors, agreed. However, being Irish, I see my ancestors and European groups generally as having changed through a process of cultural evolution, not through a rigerous system of extermination.

There are parallels between the Native Austrialians and the Native Americans. Was one treated worse than the other? Was the desease impact worse on Native Americans or on the Australian? Are we even competant to judge. There certainly was vial, well documented desimation of the Mexican and South American native peoples through imported desease, enslavement, mistreatment and murder.

If you don't believe my numbers, do your own research. The numbers vary depending on who you read. I've seen pre-European numbers as low as 350,000 and as high as 800,000. I've seen numbers for 1900 as low as 90,000 and as high as 200,000. Most articles tended to agree with my "about" figures. But it makes no difference. The scale of deaths among the native Australians is still shameful in the eyes of the world.
 
Aren't remorse and an apology two different things? I suggested a declaration of wrongdoing, which can be just dripping with remorse--and an end to it. And didn't you dig a little deep for this? 1982 and 2008 are worlds apart in terms of social consciousness of the time.

I don't think I dug particularly deeply to observe that you objected to apologizing to people for "something neither they nor I was involved in." The people doing the apologizing, in Austrailia, are apologizing for things done by people still very much alive to people still very much alive.

As for a declaration of wrongdoing sans apology - I think that works reasonably well for something that one had no hand in. However, when the people who carried out the wrongdoing are still around to make the apology, there's no excuse for not making it. Otherwise, it turns into one of those "mistakes were made" non-statements that shuffles off the blame into vague unnamed regions of the imagination. It can also appear to suggest that the speaker in question is more concerned with his or her personal image and positioning than with the suffering of the victims of a terrible wrong.
 
Last edited:
That's fine. Different perspectives. I think the issues need to be (logically) redressed. I think apologizing to someone who wasn't involved by someone who wasn't involved is a bastardization of the word "apologize" and a manipulative guilt trip. But that's just me.

I suppose, then, that we will simply differ. I don't feel manipulated when I'm asked to recognize the wrongs that my country has done in the past and to express remorse. I don't see what anyone gains from it other than what little meager solace a sincere apology can be for the dreadful sins of the past. To pick and cavil over the terms of the statement seems, to me, to undermine the sincerity of the sentiment.
 
I was shocked to learn (via the BBC) that the policy of offering white Europeans ten-pound fares to Australia to come settle the coastal areas and keep them white extended into the 1970's and 80's. I believe they gave the date of the last fares as 1982. It seems to me that living people can certainly express some remorse for that policy, at least.

The unofficial "White Australia" policy ended in the 1950s but the ten pound scheme continued. The ten pound scheme had entrance requirements and sponsorship by existing Australians. About one third of those going to Australia on such schemes returned to their former country within five years - but a significant percentage of that third then returned to Australia.

The entrance requirements to Australia included a language test. For "acceptable" immigrants the test would be in their own language or English. For unacceptable immigrants the language would be something obscure such as Gaelic, Welsh or Catalan - whatever the potential immigrant wouldn't know.

Australia was worried by the large population of Indonesia to the North. If immigration had been open to all they feared being flooded with people from SE Asia.

Australia had significant numbers of Chinese workers in the 19th Century, many of them on unfair contracts which exploited them as cheap labour and gave no right of residence. The "White Australia" policy was introduced to stop such practices. In its way it was as divisive as apartheid in South Africa but it is now history.

The aborigines were non-people in their own country and treated badly. The newest immigrant had more rights than any aborigine.

Og
 
I'm all for rewriting the history of what happened and making declarations of what was wrong in today's light and making sure that it isn't going on now--but apologizing for something I didn't do (and that was done in an entirely different social climate than I'm living in) and just throwing money at people who also weren't around when it happened? Sorry, no. If it's still happening to any degree, stop that now and declare it's wrong. Apologize to someone today and make them rich for something neither I nor they were invovled in? No. And I'm not just reacting to the Australian aborigine issue.

I understand what you're saying here-- My mother's family were slaves themselves, in Russia, and came here during WWII-- so had nothing to do with the slavery of blacks in the early days of our history.

But I am not visibly a descendent of slaves, and I have all the benefits of what's called "White Privilege" and trust me, what was happening to the Australian Aboriginals, and to our American natives and Blacks, is still happening to a significant degree.

It's very easy to say "Stop that now" but you are trying to stop a mode of thought that has been in place so long that most of us don't even realise it's in us. We are convinced, in fact, that it isn't. And to begin to address it, we have to reach back and deal with the history that put it there.
 
Back
Top