More handpicked essays just for you.
The impact of the european settlement to indigenous
What impact did the european settlement have on indigenous people
European impact on the indigenous people
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: The impact of the european settlement to indigenous
After 10 long years Torres Strait Islander Eddie ‘Koiki’ Mabo has lead indigenous Australians to a victory over the Queensland government. This win this case is a historical moment, as of yesterday, the indigenous Australians have been recognised as the owners of Murray Island. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders are known to have resided in Australia, 40,000 to 60,000 years before the British arrived in 1788. When the British took over they decided to take all the land for themselves even though the indigenous Australians were here first. This court case recognises indigenous Australians unique connection to the land and acknowledges that they have the rights to the land.
The High Court hearings concluded in May 1991 and then took many months before the verdict was finally announced in June 1992. By a majority of six-to-one, the High Court ruled a landmark decision that made native title to land recognised by the common law of Australia. This monumental finding overlooked the notion that when the land was, so they say, ‘discovered’ by Captain Cook in 1778 it was terra nullius, or uncivilised
On June 3 1992, the legal decision of the Mabo case was made by the High Court, the highest court in Australia’s legal system (Webb, 2008). For thousands of years before the arrival of the British in 1788, Aboriginals and Torres Strait Islanders have had their strong connection to the Australian Land. When the British arrived in 1788, it was declared that the country was terra nullius (land belonging to nobody), which resulted to the absence of recognition towards the connection between the Aboriginals and Torres Strait Islanders and the Australian land. The declaration of terra nullius also resulted to the British taking land without agreement or payment towards the indigenous Australians (Webb, 2008).
In Australia the Europeans took over all the land that the Aboriginals had owned for over 40,000 years. They had lost their livelihood, living in dumps and small humpies, no where near a safe or healthy environment. The indigenous people were treated very inhumanely; being told where they can go, where they can’t go and who they can have relationships with. Of course they grew extremely angry and something drastic needed to
This correlates to the ideology of heritage and identity within Australia. Australia was known as terra nullius (land unoccupied) when European settlers colonised due to their belief that indigenous Australians were a different race similar to fauna (Byrne 2003). Jones and Harris (1998) expand on this notion with the idea that European settlers deemed themselves the first occupiers of Australian land due to their discourse surrounding the permanency and entitlement of land ownership. This Euro-centric construct of land ownership is discussed within the article with specific importance placed colonials concept of being an inheritor of the land rather than an invader and also the historical European concept of racial identities and their link to ‘the nation’ (Byrne 2003, p. 78). It was seen that because the indigenous Australians didn’t comply to the settler’s social construct of home, then the land wasn’t owned and therefore any remains were also free for the taking.
The motivation that provoked the British to settle in Australia was to expand their empire. Historian’s opinions on why New South Wales was colonised in 1788 has changed over time due to the evidence that has been found. Historians originally thought that Australia was colonized as a ’dumping’ ground for convicts and place for them to be transported to, although through further evidence and changing views with historians, it gives us the different perspective that Australia was colonised for the expansion of the British Empire. This essay will argue that Australia was colonised to expand the Empire of the British people. Botany Bay provided good resources for them to use such as Flax and Timber used for making cloths and building ships.
During World War 2 the Australian prime minister, John Curtin, called on America for help. This speech will present evidence to prove the hypothesis: the social benefits of the Americans being deployed in Australia outweigh the negative social impacts. This will be done by addressing 3 main focus questions. These questions are: when and why did the American troops come to Australia? How did the Australian society benefit from the American presence?
The Australian Constitution written in the 1890s has recognised the position of Indigenous Australians in a discriminatory and racist manner. “Indigenous Australians” is an inclusive term used when referring to both Aboriginal and Torres Strait islanders, also known as the “first peoples”. They are the people who were living on this continent for 125 000 years before the beginning of the British colonisation pre 1788.
In the years 1606 and 1770 over 50 European ships landed in Australia, which at the time was inhabited by the aborigines. Currently, the British are given the credit for this exploration, however this essay will argue that the British and the Dutch deserve equal credit. Although the Dutch exploration discovered the north, west and south parts of Australia (more than the British, whom only discovered the north side), Captain Cook claimed Australia and conducted extensive exploration of the east coast. The main Dutchman who deserves the credit is Willem Janszoon, but that doesn’t mean that no other Dutch explored Australia, Janszoon prompted further exploration from the Dutch. Some credit can be given to Captain James Cook for exploring the east side.
With the prohibition of the Indian Act, it restricted Aboriginal people in order to obtain their rights, due to being unable to obtain a lawyer, which could represent them to order to prosecute the government to gain their rights that were stripped from them, due to being the “Others”. The government in many ways made sure to alienate the Aboriginals in order not have a voice which could be heard and allowed the support of people in order to help them, but the Aboriginals were barbaric people they needed to be civilized, this is where “The government took for itself the power to mould, unilaterally, every aspect of life on the reserve and to create whatever infrastructure it deemed necessary to achieve the desired end — assimilation through
The physical and mental abuse inflicted on the Indigenous Australian’s, by the Europeans, is now recognised as, very un-Australian. The Australian government done the right thing when it came to apologising to the Indigenous Australians. As the first Europeans never apologised for the pain and heartache felt by the Indigenous Australians, it was up to our government to apologise and help mend the gap between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians. Paul Keating and Kevin Rudd are amongst the few politicians that have formally apologised to the Stolen Generations and other that were impacted by the settlement.
They assimilated the aboriginals, made them isolated, and they dominated them because they were more imperial. The quote justifies how the aboriginals were treated in such a catastrophic
It is evident that tension and conflict grew between the Aboriginals and the British colonists in the early stages of British settlement because the two different cultures did not understand each other’s ways of life. The Aboriginals lived in harmony with the land- often moving around and living without buildings or weapons. However, when the British settlers arrived in Australia they built large buildings and brought in foreign animals. They also fenced off land originally owned by the Aboriginals through the process of Terra Nullius. However, because of the lack of cultural understanding between the natives and the settlers, many conflicts broke out.
Abstract Being an aborigine in a white dominated society is a complicated identity. Australia, one of the white governed nations, also owns many aboriginal tribes. They lived harmonious lives in the early period. But European colonization has made a profound effect on the lives of Aboriginals in Australia, which led to the total demolition of their native culture, identity and history. As a result the new generation Aboriginals have lost their Aboriginal heritage and have been accepted neither by Aboriginals nor by whites.
Once the British naval officer James Cook landed on the continent, the population has been subject to massacres, disease, alcoholism, forced integration, and overall surrender. Lack of information into the Aboriginal culture has emerged until recent years. Nevertheless, the leading issues are more of development discourse and aid practice offshore generally focuses on failed states, problems of governance and policy failure, while excluding any focus on the indigenous population (Altman, 2007). This resulted in an impoverish state of the Aboriginals, with effects such as: inadequacy in a cash economy, lack of natural rights, poor education, low life expectancy, and impoverish living conditions; which have become key factors into the devastation of the native population from being once the oldest, greatest standing cultures in Australia, to a near extinct indigenous population. These factors are dependent on the position that the dominating culture as positioned the indigenous populations, under the poverty
