his 385 paper
TRANSCRIPT
8/10/2019 His 385 Paper
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/his-385-paper 1/25
1
John was an average Aboriginal boy who lived within his tribe for the initial portion of
his young existence. He like other children his age had both a strong societal surrounding within
the context of his tribal culture as well as an extensive family unit which was both supportive, as
well as more than welcoming to the elements which he brought to their lives. However, John like
many other Aboriginal children, faced the reality of the long-standing colonization of their native
lands by the British settlers which had for the past century resulted in continual frontier strife, as
well as ongoing governmental suppression of their freedoms. It was through these legislative
avenues that the white settlers were capable of enacting laws and regulations which would
attempt to both suppress certain cultural traditions, while simultaneously attempting to “breed
out” the cultural differences between both cultures and result in a dominant white society free of
any Aboriginal complex. This forced John to be removed from his home in 1948, and placed into
an institution whose legal purpose was to integrate him into a white evangelical culture. “I was
definitely not told that I was Aboriginal. What the Sisters told us was that we had to be white. It
was drummed into our heads that we were white. It didn't matter what shade you were. We
thought we were white.”1 It is from these lost voices of the Aboriginal culture which express
obvious attempts on the behalf of the white settlers to implement practices such as noticeably
obtrusive policies as well as the direct removal of Aboriginal children in order to destroy their
culture.
While this subject matter includes an extensive amount of content, for the purpose of this
essay, I will discuss elements of the European colonial society which clearly depicts aspects of
ethnocide, in four differing sections. These sections depict critical moments, as well as aspects of
1 Australia and Meredith Wilkie, “Bringing them home: report of the national inquiry into the separation of
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children from their families,” Human Rights and Equal Opportunity
Commission, 1997, 144.
8/10/2019 His 385 Paper
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/his-385-paper 2/25
2
the historical events which occurred throughout the continued expansion of the European settlers
into to continent of Australia. First, we will acknowledge the initial arrival as well as first
contacts that existed between the white settlers and the Aboriginal populous. This section also
will include discussion of the British Parliament and their feelings towards contact with the
Aborigines, the preexisting undertones of racial tensions and the attempts at expansionism which
inevitably led to these two cultures colliding. Then the discussion will focus primarily on the
ideology of scientific superiority that had formed within the established settlements and the
belief that the Aborigines “fragility” would result in their culture‟s demise. Next, we will
examine differing policies which stemmed from an aggressive desire to assimilate the “half -
caste” portion of the Aboriginal population while simultaneously attempting to ensure the “full-
blood” population remained as dismal as possible. This was accomplished through policies
which allowed for the economic and political dominance over the indigenous population as well
as resulted in the initiation of child removal practices throughout the provinces. Finally, I will
discuss the nature of the institutions as well as the foster home systems that were established
which resulted in the ethnocide of Australia‟s indigenous peoples.
With the arrival of the British settlers, so to marked the introduction of a new society as
well as culture on the continent of Australia in the late eighteenth century. However, it was the
previous arrival of the Aborigines and their preexisting culture which marks the beginning point
in the eventual devolution of their cultural identity. According to historian Colin Tatz, the
Aboriginal population arrived in Australia some point between twenty-four thousand and sixty
thousand years ago. Their arrival in “Cape York ” marked a distinct moment in the history as the
only population that was capable of maintaining their culture until the much later arrival of the
British population. It was this seclusion from any other society or cultural influence which
8/10/2019 His 385 Paper
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/his-385-paper 3/25
3
resulted in the Aborigines ability to grow in an expansive nature, reaching between five hundred
and seven hundred and fifty thousand members by the time the British crown arrived.2
The aspiration of the British Parliament to expand and form a new colony were first
realized following their failure to maintain an effective strong-hold on both the political and
economic activities that transpired within the American colonies. Following this unsuccessful
campaign, the British Parliament saw the Australian continent as a pristine opportunity to lay
roots and establish a colony which would not suffer from the same mistakes which had plagued
earlier ventures. It was explorer James Cook whose voyages in 1771 resulted in the Royal
Proclamation of territory off the eastern coast of Australia which allowed for this endeavor to
occur. It was Cook‟s early observations of the Aboriginal population which first brought notice
to the nature of the Aboriginal existence, stating “They live in a Tranquility which is not
disturb‟d by the Inequality of Conidyll; The Earth and sea of their own accord furnishes the, with
all the things necessary for life.”3 With an extensive population of convicts and an inability to
further unload them upon the American colonies, the British Parliament made the decision to
launch a penal colony on the lands within New South Wales which had been originally after the
voyages of Cook in 1770. Following the finalization of this legislative decision, the Crown
began to bring together the ships necessary to make the voyage to the Australian continent which
would be known as the White Fleet. According to historian Anthony Kevin Cavanagh, the fleet
itself consisted of eleven differing ships which included six transport ships, three store ships and
two naval escorts. This fleet also contained a total population of 548 male and 188 female
2 Colin Tatz, Genocide in Australia (Sydney: Aboriginal Studies Press), 6-7.
3 Ben Kiernan, Blood and Soil: A World History of Genocide and Extermination from Sparta to Darfur ( New Haven &
London: Yale University Press), 249
8/10/2019 His 385 Paper
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/his-385-paper 4/25
4
convicts.4 From this we can see an obvious expenditure of the behalf of England who was
intending to further cement its presence within the global community and extend its economic
reach to the far stretches of the South Pacific.
Arriving in Botany Bay on January 28, 1788, the settlers began establishing the
foundations of their own colony in hopes of constructing a self-sufficient colony within a
relatively small time frame. It was the direct regulations given by King George III to insure that
the settlement had a positive impact on the lands and the encompassing populations of people
which they may have come into contact with. This point is further strengthened by the directions
of the first Governor of the British colony Arthur Phillips, who reiterated that his official
instructions were to “endeavor by every means in his power to open an intercourse with the
natives and to conciliate their goodwill, requiring all persons under his Government to live in
amity and kindness with them.”5 These policies which were flourishing throughout the
Australian colonial society garnered greater support when on February 19, 1836 The Letters
Patent, a formal document establishing the Province of South Australia stated “nothing should
affect the rights of the natives in regards to their enjoyment or occu pation of the land.”6 Still,
these notions of both cultural equality and the ability to economically coexist through the
application of colonial policies were just that, notions The reality of the situation was that the
inhabitants of the colony in the late eighteenth and early nineteenth century had their own
personal perspectives of those who were dissimilar to the white settlers who they believed
controlled the majority of the continent. Furthermore, it was the great distance that these laws
and policies traveled with the European settlers which very often fell on deaf ears.
4 A.K. Cavanagh, “ The Return of the First Fleet Ships,” The Great Circle 12, no.2 (1989): 2
5 Tatz, Genocide In Australia, 8
6 Tatz, Genocide In Australia, 8
8/10/2019 His 385 Paper
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/his-385-paper 5/25
5
Aspirations for continued expansion provided a major point of contention between the
European settlers and the varying aboriginal tribes which did come into contact with one another.
The white settlers saw the vast land plots throughout the Australian continent as valuable
opportunities to supply both colonial as well as the needs of the crown. This directly conflicted
with the motives of the indigenous populations whose intentions centralized around their own
personal subsistence. It was these varying environmental perspectives on the importance of these
land gains which led to one of the preliminary aspects of the ethnocide of the Aboriginal
population. According to historian Ben Kiernan, very often the desire to expand the land gains
which one society currently has very often played a pivotal role in genocidal actions. Based on
his cults of cultivation theory, “Genocidal conquerors legitimize their terrestrial expansion by
racial superiority or glorious antiquity at the same time as they claim a unique capacity to put the
conquered lands into productive agricultural use.”7 In the 1840‟s the desire for land expansion
erupted in varying forms such as sheep pastoralism and mineral mining. While the establishment
of agriculture had always in some sense been the focal motivation for land acquisitions, soon
after the formal establishment of the self-governing colony of Queensland mining for valuable
minerals resulted in the mass influx of settlers looking to an opportunity for wealth. “Colonial
occupation of most of Queensland was achieved by the agricultural industry between 1840 and
1884, by which time it had consumed most of the colony. The early rush into the into the
southern districts meant that by the time Queensland separated from New South Wales in 1859,
there 1300 squatting stations which leased approximately one quarter of Queensland from the
British Crown… .”8 It was actions such as these that directly conflicted with the lifestyles of the
indigenous populous and more importantly their primary means of existence. “ White settlement,
7 Kiernan, Blood and Soil: A World History of Genocide and Extermination from Sparta to Darfur , 29
8 Alison Palmer, Colonial Genocide (S. Australia: Crawford Housing Publishing), 87
8/10/2019 His 385 Paper
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/his-385-paper 6/25
6
with its usurpation of hunting and food gathering grounds quickly undermines its economic life,
that is, the tribesmen‟s means of livelihood, and interferers drastically with the give and take of
social life.”9 From this, the initial aspirations of the European settlers to establish pastoral
colonies throughout much of Australia became obvious, directly resulting in an overwhelming
burden upon the Aborigines, whose nomadic lifestyle were inevitably affected. The white settlers
felt an increasing resentment as well as distain for the Aboriginal which would fester into an
argument to thoroughly remove the continent of such objections to European society.
In the decades that followed the white settler‟s first arrival to Australia, they quickly
assumed control over the Indigenous population. It was soon after this that the European
population developed a blossoming society which required increasing land to meet their growing
needs. The resulting land expansion campaigns had left the Aborigines attempting to maintain
their cultural identity through what little means had not been taken from them. Very often, the
results of these expansion were the complete removal of the Aborigines from these lands which
had been associated with their culture for thousands of years. This devastation forced the tribe‟s
population to either travel in hopes of acquiring other lands which had yet to be utilized or to live
on the very outskirts of the territories which white settlers were so quickly to overwhelm and
take. The colony of Victoria provided one of the harshest examples of this forced exile and
furthermore an element of cultural genocide with policies such as the Aborigines Protection Act
of 1886. According to historian Corinne Manning, it was the Victorian government‟s position
that the Indigenous population‟s lives were to be fully regulated and the construction of reserves
was to be completed in order to meet their specific living needs. It was this act in 1886 that
incorporated the protectorate ideals which were applied to the treatment of both the full- blooded
9 A.P. Elkin, “Reaction and Integration: A Food Gathering People and European Settlement in Australia,” American
Anthropologist 53, no. 2 (1951): 166
8/10/2019 His 385 Paper
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/his-385-paper 7/25
7
Aboriginals as well as the „half -castes‟ who were of both Indigenous and European decent. This
policy target was to provide economic aid and housing in the form of mission stations for
Aboriginal people who were over the age of thirty-four and had families.10
However, most of the
time these policies garnered no aid from the European government and resulted in their failures
to support the Aboriginal people. This resulted in the eventual closure of nearly all the mission
stations within the colony, forcing the majority of the Aboriginal populous to construct and live
in slums which surrounded the white settler‟s society, commonly referred to as „humpies‟.
According to a 1997 report collected by the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission,
on one humpie village within the Victorian colony, “about 59 adults and 107 children lived in the
most squalid conditions. Their „humpies‟ are mostly constructed of old timber, flattened
kerosene tins and hessian… They are not waterproof, have earthy floors, very primitive cooking
arrangements and no laundry or bathing facilities…”11
The conditions in which the European
settlers allowed for Aboriginal people to exist in expressed an obvious disregard for the culture
of these people all in the name of land expansion. White settlers made a conscious effort to
neglect the needs of the Aborigines and therefore allowed for their populous to deplete,
completing an act of ethnocide.
Among the varying societal objectives which have been mentioned, it is critical that one
investigates the mindset of a European settler during this period of colonization. Only then will
we have a greater comprehension of the actions for which they took against the Indigenous
people and their underlying purposes. Following the massive expansions of land control which
occurred primarily up until the late 1880‟s, the tensions which occurred as a result of the cultural
10 Corinne Manning, “A Helping White Hand: Assimilation, Welfare and Victoria’s Transitional Aboriginal Housing
Policy,” Laboour History , no. 87 (2004): 19311
Australia and Meredith Wilkie, “Bringing them home: report of the national inquiry into the separation of
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children from their families,” 53.
8/10/2019 His 385 Paper
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/his-385-paper 8/25
8
clash of the two socities was at an all-time high. The European society had continued to ascertain
political authority over the resistant Indigenous and with that maintain control over their
culture‟s evolution. With this need for control came an overbearing superiority complex which
widely attested to the overall hardiness of the European settlers and also the „fragility‟ of the
native populations for which they had come into contact with. These feelings towards the
Aboriginal‟s inferiority stemmed from varying portions of their culture, allowing the white
settlers to foresee their inevitable demise. Understanding this, we see that the white settlers
surmised that the existence of the Aboriginal tribes of Australia would soon come to an end. This
belief allowed for the political officials to in act legislation and adopt policies which would
directly result in the ethnocide of the Aborigines.
One of the most commonly mentioned political disadvantages of the Indigenous
existence was their absence of any system of formal government as well as lacking major
components of an effective society which the European settlers found critical for survival. “The
fact that initially there seemed to be no individualistic kings, queens, priests, warriors, or chiefs
with whom the British might negotiate, also helped to create an environment that could support
both genocide and its denial.”12
This misconceptions about Aboriginal society was a common
train of thought that permitted the white settlers to act in the nature they felt was most beneficial
for the expansion of their society, fully aware that this would be at the expense of the varying
tribes which from their perspective were often absent from the lands which they settled.
Historian Dirk Moses notes, “The absence of hierarchical social system and professional
warriors permanently organized for aggressive conflict helped to render the whole population
invisible, an attitude eventually confirmed in law when the extreme land annexations of the late
12 Dirk Moses, Genocide and Settler Society: Frontier and Stolen Indigenous Children in Australian History (New
York: Berghahn Books, 2004), 84.
8/10/2019 His 385 Paper
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/his-385-paper 9/25
9
1820‟s and 1830‟s made clarification of Aboriginal people‟s legal position mandatory.”13
The
Aboriginal people were an obstacle for the settlers to overcome, rather than attempting to
produce a society which was culturally diverse and allowed for the inclusion of Aboriginal
sentiments.
Another major aspect which one must consider when discussing the European settler ‟s
treatment of the Aboriginal population was the over extending perspective that the indigenous
were incapable of sustaining their own existence and maintain an effective presence in the future.
Following the establishment of varying colonial and provincial governments throughout much of
the Australian continent, there was an open discussion as to the inferiority of the Aboriginal race
and the acknowledgement that their culture was coming to an end. During The Canberra
Conference in 1937, Dr. Cecil Cook stated, “If we leave them alone, they will die, and we still
have no problem, apart from dealing with those pangs of conscience, which must attend the
passing of a dying race.”14
However, what was very often disregarded by the white settlers was
the impact which they had upon the Aborigines and the resulting depletion of their population.
One of the most unmentioned of these actions were the diseases which plagued the Indigenous,
whose bodies were not familiar with these illnesses. With specific reference to smallpox, the
Aborigines were rendered helpless to the effects that stemmed from their inability to combat the
illness or ascertain the effective medication needed to stop its spread. Though this devastation
had been seen previously throughout differing attempts to colonize new lands, it was the method
in which the European settlers used these „ biological weapons‟ to ensure that the population of
the Aborigines would dramatically deplete. According to economic historian Noel Butlin, the
arrival of disease was turned into a purposeful act of extermination rather than an inevitable side
13 Moses, Genocide and Settler Society: Frontier and Stolen Indigenous Children in Australian History , 87
14 Moses, Genocide and Settler Society: Frontier and Stolen Indigenous Children in Australian History , 237
8/10/2019 His 385 Paper
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/his-385-paper 10/25
10
effect of two cultures interacting of the first time.15
While there is an overall consensus among
historians that this epidemic did in fact occur and that the primary victims of this were in fact the
native populations, it was the position of the colonial government that the Aboriginal suffered
from fragility which made them more susceptible to these diseases.16
Even more disturbing was
that not only was there a widely understood cure for smallpox which continued to plague the
Aboriginal peoples until the late 1860‟s, but that the white settlers had this vaccine known as
variola readily available for usage within the colony. “Certainly, it was known that variola had
been brought with the Fleet, and understanding of variola‟s role in both preventing and
unleashing the disease was readily available to both the medical fraternity and the officer
class.”17
From this, the underlying motives of the European settlers became clearer and
thoroughly expressed an intent to destroy the Aboriginal culture. Furthermore, there is an
obvious willingness to actively stand by and watch the Aboriginal population be erased from the
Australian continent which showed that the colonial leadership had genocidal intentions.
According to then Chief Protector of Western Australia A.O. Neville, the demise of the
Aboriginal was the inevitable result of the theory of Darwinism and was destined to occur.
“Contact between the Aboriginal peoples and the whites was culturally lethal, the Aboriginal
social organization was unusually fragile, and thus that the extinction of these peoples as a
distinct entity was just a matter of time.”18
Other government officials such as William Gall, the
then Under-Secretary for the Home Department of Queensland suggested that the usage of
sterilization could be an effective measure when dealing with the half-caste population which
15 Tatz, Genocide in Australia, 11
16 Robert Krieken, “Rethinking Cultural Genocide: Aboriginal Child Removal and Settler- Colonial State Formations,”
Oceania 75, no. 2 (2004): 12617
Moses, Genocide and the Settler Society: Frontier and Stolen Indigenous Children in Australian History , 8118
Patrick O’Malley, “Gentle Genocide: The Government of Aboriginal Peoples in Central Australia,” Social Justice
21, no. 4 (1994): 52
8/10/2019 His 385 Paper
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/his-385-paper 11/25
11
had continued to permeate the European colonial society.19
Still, it was this hardened belief in
The Doomed Theory among both the leading government officials as well the colonial society at
large, which allowed for the implementation of racially biased legislation, effectively leading to
the loss of Aboriginal culture. These perspectives were very often upheld by “scientific” research
which was collected on the behalf of the colonial governments in hopes of supporting their
discriminatory ideologies. These policies which would vary from colony to colony consisted of
proposed actions which at face value were stated to have bettered the lifestyles of the Aboriginal.
Overall however, these policies expressed an immense interest in taking both societal and
cultural actions which would render Aboriginal natives an extinct species. From these political
measures, a clear notion of ethnocide can be articulated which can also be supported by historian
Ben Kiernan‟s definition of these types of actions. “Imposing a new culture on a group, for
instance, by the enforcement of educational or linguistic restrictions, without necessarily causing
physical destruction or biological disappearance.”20
As time would progress, this would include
removal of Indigenous children from their indigenous family networks and leave them incapable
of identifying their cultural origins. Furthermore, this would result in suppression of their culture
in a manner which took on differing avenues.
The legislative variations which existed between the differing colonial governments of
the nineteenth century expressed the differing values which colonial leaders placed upon these
Aboriginal populations and more importantly their future forced incorporation into European
society. Specifically, it was the legislation‟s increasing focus on the assimilation or „merging „of
the Indigenous half-castes into white society which expressed an increasing belief that with the
proper regulations, the dream of a more fully integrated European society was possible.
19 Moses, Genocide and the Settler Society: Frontier and Stolen Indigenous Children in Australian History, 227
20 Kiernan, Blood and Soil: A World History of Genocide and Extermination from Sparta to Darfur , 13
8/10/2019 His 385 Paper
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/his-385-paper 12/25
12
According to historian Corrine Manning, the process of assimilation was, “…associated with
federal and state government policies introduced in the 1950‟s and 1960‟s which were aimed at
socially re-engineering Aborigines and migrants to reflect the Anglo-Australian majority.”21
It
was this perspective which led to the beginning of discovering legal means to remove the
Aboriginal from their communities for the purpose of assimilation. The most fundamental of
these processes was the establishment of the Protectorate System in January of 1838. This
process was established within the colonies specific reservations or land claims which were
primarily for the housing of the Aboriginal who had been uprooted following the extensive
expansion campaigns which had occurred in the decades following the white settler‟s ar rival. It
purpose was to allow for the natives to construct their own self-sufficient communities which
were centralized around the pastoral agricultural values which had arrived with the Europeans.22
The establishment of both institutions and missionaries were also a mechanism to ensure that
Aboriginal influence would not interfere with the settler‟s claims to the lands which they had
been removed from. However, this method was unable to sustain the cultural results which the
Europeans desired and led to its eventual failure by the mid nineteenth century. This process
provided another means of ethnocide which inevitably left the Aboriginal uprooted from their
communities as well as dependent on governmental rations which had left, “the nomadic people
dependent on the new supplies and thus creating a sedentary population, more amendable to the
government of the missions.”23
Failing to find control of these Indigenous tribes through this
containment experiment, it was found that excessive regulation of the Aboriginal‟s very
21 Manning, “A Helping Hand: Assimilation, Welfare and Victoria’s Transitional Aboriginal Housing Policy,” 193
22 Australia, and Meredith Wilkie, “Bringing them home: report of the national inquiry into the separation of
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children from their families,” 23. 23
O’Malley, “Gentle Genocide: The Government of Aboriginal Peoples In Central Australia,” 51
8/10/2019 His 385 Paper
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/his-385-paper 13/25
13
existence was necessary in order to eliminate this problem which the settlers had failed to
complete from their initial attempts.
By the early portion of the twentieth century, with the establishment of the Australian
Commonwealth, the differing provinces were successful in enacting some forms of legislation or
construction of an overseeing board which maintained absolute control over the Aborigines.
Following 1911, each of the territories with the exception of Tasmania had established a Chief
Protector, whose focal purpose was to observe and manage the actions of the Aborigines. Other
legislation such as the Native Administration Act of 1936, establish by Chief Protector A.O.
Neville went further and regulated almost all personal freedoms which their white counterparts
were permitted to indulge in. “Native Administration Act of Western Australia gave the Chief
Protector of Aborigines direct control over Aboriginal peoples‟ sexual relations, social relations,
marriage, geographical mobility…custody of children – even over where they could camp and
what law referred to as their “tribal parties”.”24
This policy and others alike such as the
Aborigines Protection Act 1909 and the Aboriginal Welfare Board, were intended as a means for
the government to directly control the cultural practices of the natives. This authority which was
granted to these Chief Protectors would eventually lead to the ethnocide of the indigenous tribes
through the stealing of children. Specifically, it was the final intentions of the government to
dismantle the culture of the Aborigines with the formal removal of young children, as well as the
assimilation of the half-caste population into the European society. However, it was a meeting of
the Commonwealth and the state‟s Aboriginal officials on April 23, 1937 which would fully
solidify the government‟s position on the future of these natives and their role in the European
society which had been erected around them. “That this Conference believes that the destiny of
24 O’Malley, “Gentle Genocide: The Government of Aboriginal Peoples In Central Australia,” 48
8/10/2019 His 385 Paper
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/his-385-paper 14/25
14
the natives of aboriginal origin, but not of the full blood, lies in their ultimate absorption by the
people of the Commonwealth, and it therefor recommend that all efforts be directed to that
end.”25
It was this understood mindset which led to the beginning of child removal and
furthermore the loss of Aboriginal culture. Though children had been removed by force ever
since the European settlers had arrived in Australia, for the first time the removal was done with
the intention of erasing their cultural existence.
With the introduction of this mindset, the removal process quickly began to be performed
throughout the provinces. It was the goal of the government and its officials to ensure that the
removal of as many children as possible would occur in order to deplete the Indigenous
population and further strengthen their European influence. Through the usage of the regulatory
powers that were held by the Chief Protectors of many of the provinces like Western Australia,
the government was able to separate the children from their family units and place them in the
state‟s care. This resulted in the increasing establishment of both missions as well as government
settlements which were to house the children. With these removals, very often the promise of a
formal education was given to the families and ensured that the well-being of the child was their
primary objective. Many officials understood that the Aborigines wanted to ensure that their
children would have the opportunity of higher education and a means to find success for
themselves as well as their community members. However, what was unknown was the low
educational quality of these institutions and very often the dismay that was placed upon the
children who were removed. “The authorities said I was removed from my parents so I could
receive an education but the fact is the nuns never gave me that education. I didn't receive an
25 Australian Commonwealth, Aboriginal Welfare: Initial Conference of Commonwealth and State Aboriginal
Authorities, 23, April 1937
8/10/2019 His 385 Paper
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/his-385-paper 15/25
15
education. I was very neglected.”26
The actions of the officials who ran these varying institutions
often reflected an identical racial sentiment as to the policies that had led to establishment. Even
when some form of government financial support was provided to these stations quite often it
was not used for its intended purpose of maintaining a credible existence for its Aboriginal
inhabitants. With specificity to the education process, the lacking of attentive officials as well as
monetary backing resulted in an increasingly uneducated Aboriginal population who has no
ability to change this process. “I didn‟t have much schooling … Now, thinking about it, we were
told from the outset that we had to go to the mission because we had to go to school, but then
when we got in there we weren‟t forced to go to school or anything.”
27
The inability of the white
society to effectively establish an education system which in fact provided a worthy education
expresses that their intentions were merely to introduce the separation process into their society.
From this, we can see that the desire to assimilate had begun and the objective was to eliminate
the Aboriginals ability to maintain their individual sense of culture.
Very often, the pull of a formal education was not enough for the parents of the children
to allow governmental officials to step in and remove their children to these varying institutions.
The native families who opposed this process were subjected to biased legislative policies which
resulted in successful removal processes and therefore broke indigenous children away from any
cultural identity. It was the Chief Protectors such as A.O. Neville and James Isdell who would
employ removal processes which included the usage of the local police forces to hunt down and
collect half-caste children in order to bring them to these institutions and wipe them of their past
cultural identity. “In the removal work, Neville always worked closely with the police. He
26 Australia, and Meredith Wilkie, “Bringing them home: report of the national inquiry into the separation of
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children from their families,” 148. 27
Australia, and Meredith Wilkie, “Bringing them home: report of the national inquiry into the separation of
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children from their families,” 148.
8/10/2019 His 385 Paper
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/his-385-paper 16/25
8/10/2019 His 385 Paper
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/his-385-paper 17/25
17
expresses the conditions for which the inhabitants experienced stating that the institution, “…had
rapidly declined under a brutal indifference. Here economy had taken the form of ignoring
maintenance and any improvement of buildings, reducing to a minimum the diet of „inmates‟ and
doing away with the use of cutlery- the children in the compound being forced to eat with their
hands.”31
Being unable to provide from themselves, the children were at the mercy of the
institutional employees whose continued neglect led to the suffering of the children. It was this
manner of neglect which was ensured by government leaders to cease when they were taken into
the custody of these institutions, and out of the „unbearable‟ living conditions that existed within
the tribal communities. “Sometimes at night we‟d cry with hunger, no food…We had to
scrounge in the town dump, eating old bread, smashing tomato sauce bottles, licking them.”32
It
is the nature of this direct testimony from Aborigines which speaks volumes as to the struggles
which had to be experienced on a regular basis.
Beyond the lacking fiscal support which was a clear act of negligence directed towards
the Aboriginal inhabitants, some of the biggest tribulations which they were forced to experience
were the physical and mental abuses which they were subject to. Within the walls of these
government operated institutions, there was an overwhelming degree of ill-treatment which was
for the most overlooked or blatantly unacknowledged for varying reasons, most of which
stemmed from racism. One of the most trying elements of these individual experiences was the
physical separation from their parents and family networks. A side from the physical attachment
most children had, it was also the complete disconnect from their cultural identity which also
was just as damaging. It was a focal purpose of most government officials to remove these half-
31
Australia, and Meredith Wilkie, “Bringing them home: report of the national inquiry into the separation of
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children from their families,” 137. 32
Australia, and Meredith Wilkie, “Bringing them home: report of the national inquiry into the separation of
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children from their families,” 138.
8/10/2019 His 385 Paper
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/his-385-paper 18/25
18
caste children form their native environments in order to more effectively implement the
assimilation process upon the children. It was the hopes specifically of Chief Protector A.O.
Neville that this process would result in a more European and anglicized society. Based on his
theory which was referred to as the „Three Point Plan,‟ Neville expressed that only by
completely removing the children from the Aboriginal environment would assimilation process
work.33
Furthermore, it was believed that if completed successfully, assimilation would result in
a minute full-blooded Indigenous population which would be forced out of existence, based upon
a warped perspective of Darwin‟s Theory of Evolution which most white settlers possessed.
Within the institutions and missions, the primary abuse which was endured was the
complete subjugation of the Aboriginal society and their cultural distinctions which made these
children a unique body of people. Their cultural traditions including their unique dialects were
completely rejected and as a result were forced to conform to the norms established within the
white culture. “Y‟know, I can remember we used to just talk lingo. They used to tell us not to
talk that language, that it‟s devil‟s language. And they‟d wash our mouths with soap… So it sorta
wiped out all our language we knew.”34
The effectiveness of this cultural blanking was based
normally on the age when the children were taken from their families. Younger children were
more readily able to be persuaded or convinced that they were in fact a part of the white society,
regardless of their skin pigment. However, it was the older children who had a more vivid
memory of their cultural past and needed more convincing that they were to become European.
Upon reflecting on her experiences, one woman expressed, “Your family don‟t care about you
anymore, they wouldn‟t have given you away. They don‟t love you. All they are is dirty drunken
33 Tatz, Genocide in Australia, 25
34 Australia, and Meredith Wilkie, “Bringing them home: report of the national inquiry into the separation of
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children from their families,”133.
8/10/2019 His 385 Paper
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/his-385-paper 19/25
19
blacks. You heard this daily…”35
The children of the Aborigines were becoming more accustom
to the idea that they were a part of this white society and were learning their practices in order to
become more accepted within their culture‟s parameters. However, according to historian Patrick
O‟Malley, the point of this process was to eliminate any diverging aspects of culture within the
Australian realm and to have a cohesive society which answered to only one authority. “In the
evangelists eyes, it was inconceivable that a person Christian, and thus saved, and yet adhere to
traditional ways.”36
With this purpose in mind, we can fully observe a direct intention of
ethnocide from their practices, as well as the manner in which specific legislation reflected these
actions.
Much like the mental anguish which these native children were forced to embrace, so too
did they experience a varying spectrum of physical abuse which was directly connected to their
cultural values. The Aborigines were forced withstand the brutality stemming from both
institution and mission leaders who were left in charge of these government run programs and
were incapable of effectively maintaining order otherwise. These abuses also were the product of
general feelings of superiority and furthermore were violent attempts to ensure that assimilation
of the indigenous children was successful. “They were very cruel to us, very cruel. I‟ve done
things in that home that I don‟t think prisoners in a jail have to do today…I remember once, I
must have been eight or nine, and I was locked in the old morgue… I screamed all night but no
one came to get me.”37
Sexual violence was also a reoccurring issue which was commonly
overlooked, much like the previously mentioned injustices focalized around the Indigenous
children. Employees of these government programs were able impose themselves upon the
35 Australia, and Meredith Wilkie, “Bringing them home: report of the national inquiry into the separation of
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children from their families,”134.36
O’Malley, “Gentle Genocide: The Government of Aboriginal Peoples In Central Australia,” 56 37
Australia, and Meredith Wilkie, “Bringing them home: report of the national inquiry into the separation of
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children from the ir families,” 141
8/10/2019 His 385 Paper
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/his-385-paper 20/25
20
children without fearing ramifications from other authorities. According to a report compiled by
the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission, very often sexual assaults occurred
within these missions and were mostly never reported. Following this Inquiry‟s investigation, it
was found that on average almost ninety percent of sexual assaults were not reported.38
Compiled with the substandard living conditions, the inhumaneness of these institution‟s
environments exposes the true nature of the exploitation that was ongoing throughout almost all
of these institutions.
Employment of the Aborigines also expressed a great degree of racism as well as cultural
suppression throughout the process of integration. Beginning in the earlier portion of the
nineteenth century, the employment of the Indigenous population was a means to secure cheap
labor, as well as ensure that the authority remained within the hands of the white settlers.
Legislation soon followed, and effectively maintained that the governmental powers held by the
colonial leaders would remain so, and further suppressed the natives. Once again, reoccurring
themes of exploitation are quite visible, specifically among children. Prior to the implementation
of formal institutions, European settlers were known for stealing children from their families for
the purpose of employment. According to historian Shirleene Robinson, children workers were
perceived as excellent form of labor for varying reasons which included filling employment
shortages, as well as being considered pliable and easy to influence. Many white settlers also felt
as though employment provided an opportunity for native children to become „civilized‟ and
conform to European Society.39 Still, with what little wages these children received, the colonial
governments felt as though they were incapable of effectively managing their own monetary
38 Australia, and Meredith Wilkie, “Bringing them home: report of the national inquiry into the separation of
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children from their families,” 141 39
Shirleene Robinson, “ The Unregulated Employment of Aboriginal Children in Queensland, 1842-1902,” Labour
History , no. 82 (2002): 4
8/10/2019 His 385 Paper
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/his-385-paper 21/25
8/10/2019 His 385 Paper
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/his-385-paper 22/25
22
inevitably led to the greatest physical and emotional changes among a majority of the Indigenous
population. According to a report founded by the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity
Commission, the abrupt uprooting and the forced existence within the horrible conditions of the
institutions had varying permanent effects. “We had been brought up on the surrogate mother of
the institution and that whole lifestyle, which did not prepare us at all for any type of family life
or life whereby in the future we would be surviving or fending for ourselves…”43
These lacking
of needed skills can also be seen in the lacking of education, primarily stemming from the
institutions‟ failure to provide one. This inevitably limited many opportunities for the Aboriginal
children entering the employment world and seeking a feasible means to support themselves.
Finally, the traumas which occurred as a result of the forced stays within the
government institutions can be expressed as one of the biggest issues to never be fully addressed.
Without any means to receive treatment for their personal experiences, the children were forced
to endure varying abuses without help or proper protection from these events reoccurring.
According to this same report, witnesses who discussed their personal experiences very often
acknowledged long-term issues within their adult lives which included alcoholism, drug abuse,
isolationism and criminal involvement. “There is no doubt that children who have been
traumatized become a lot more anxious and fearful of the world and one of the impacts is that
they don‟t explore the world as much… because of the lack of trust in the outside world, children
learn to blunt their emotions and in that way restrict their spontaneity and responsiveness.”44
It is
from these long standing issues that observes can see that the actions taken by the European
settlers have led to a complete destruction of the Aboriginal culture. Through their actions, we
43 Australia, and Meredith Wilkie, “Bringing them home: report of the national inquiry into the separation of
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children from their families,” 163 44
Australia, and Meredith Wilkie, “Bringing them home: report of the national inquiry into the separation of
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children from their families,” 172
8/10/2019 His 385 Paper
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/his-385-paper 23/25
23
now see that the effects have left this culture in shambles and additionally left a group a people
cultureless and disconnected from their families.
It was following the arrival of the British in 1788, whereby for the first time, we can see
deliberate actions taken against the Aboriginal population and their manners of existence. The
indigenous, whose goals of self-sustainability were the inevitable target group of the early white
settlers and their colonial aspirations which included terrestrial expansions as well as cultural
assimilation. With this understanding, we can see that it was the intentional actions taken by the
European settlers which directly led to the ethnocide of the Aboriginal populous. Furthermore, it
was the direct legislative measures taken by the colonial government, as well as the introduction
of the child removal process which further cemented both racial ideologies and fueled the desires
of eliminating the Aboriginal population. It is from this perspective that we can observe the true
genocidal nature of the British colonization and also acknowledge the long lasting effects of their
actions; leaving a major portion of the Indigenous population without any cultural ties to their
families as well as a loss of cultural identity.
8/10/2019 His 385 Paper
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/his-385-paper 24/25
24
Bibliography
Primary Sources:
Australia, and Meredith Wilkie. 1997. Bringing them home: report of the national inquiry into
the separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children from their families.
Sydney: Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission.
Australian Commonwealth, Aboriginal Welfare: Initial Conference of Commonwealth and State
Aboriginal Authorities, 23, April 1937
Elkin, A.P. “Reaction and Interaction: A Food Gathering People and European Settlement in
Australia.” American Anthropologist 53, no. 2 (1951): 164-186
UN General Assembly, Prevention and punishment of the crime of genocide, 9 December 1948
Secondary Sources:
Atkison, Roslyn. “Denial and Loss: Obstacles to Litigation in Stolen Generation Cases.”
Hungarian Journal of English and American Studies 12, no.1 (2006): 47-59
Cavanagh, A.K. “The Return of the First Fleet Ships.” The Great Circle 11, no. 2 (1989): 1-16
Huggonson, David. “Aboriginal Trust Accounts in Queensland: How „Protection‟ Became
„Oppression‟.” The Australian Quarterly 62, no. 4 (1990): 366-370
Kiernan, Ben. Blood and Soil: A World History of Genocide and Extermination from Sparta to
Darfur . New York & London: Yale University Press, 2007
Krieken, Robert. “Rethinking Cultural Genocide Aboriginal Child Removal and Settler -Colonial
State Formation.” Oceania 75, no. 2 (2004): 125-151.
Manning, Corinne. “A Helping White Hand: Assimilation, Welfare and Victoria‟s Transitional
Aboriginal Housing Policy.” Labour History, no. 87 (2004): 193-208.
Markus, Andrew. “Genocide in Australia.” Aboriginal History 25 (2001): 57-69 Accessed
September 10, 2014
Moses, Dirk . Genocide and Settler Society: Frontier and Stolen Indigenous Children in Australian History. New York: Berghahn Books, 2004
O‟Malley, Pat. “Gentle Genocide: The Government of Aboriginal Peoples in Central Australia.”
Social Justice 21, no. 4 (1994): 46-65.
Palmer, Alison. Colonial Genocide. S. Australia: Crawford House Publishing, 2000.
8/10/2019 His 385 Paper
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/his-385-paper 25/25
25
Robinson, Shirleen. “The Unregulated Employment of Aboriginal Children in Queensland,
1842-1902.” Labour History, no. 82 (2002): 1-15
Tatz, Colin. Genocide in Australia. Sydney: Aboriginal Studies Press, 1999.