Another stolen generation: how Australia still wrecks Aboriginal families
64 replies, posted
[quote]
The tape is searing. There is the voice of an infant screaming as he is wrenched from his mother, who pleads, "There is nothing wrong with my baby. Why are you doing this to us? I would've been hung years ago, wouldn't I? Because [as an Aboriginal Australian] you're guilty before you're found innocent." The child's grandmother demands to know why "the stealing of our kids is happening all over again". A welfare official says, "I'm gunna take him, mate."
This happened to an Aboriginal family in outback New South Wales. It is happening across Australia in a scandalous and largely unrecognised abuse of human rights that evokes the infamous stolen generation of the last century. Up to the 1970s, thousands of mixed-race children were stolen from their mothers by welfare officials. The children were given to institutions as cheap or slave labour; many were abused.
Described by a chief protector of Aborigines as "breeding out the colour", the policy was known as assimilation. It was influenced by the same eugenics movement that inspired the Nazis. In 1997 a landmark report, Bringing Them Home, disclosed that as many 50,000 children and their mothers had endured "the humiliation, the degradation and sheer brutality of the act of forced separation ... the product of the deliberate, calculated policies of the state". The report called this genocide.
Assimilation remains Australian government policy in all but name. Euphemisms such as "reconciliation" and "Stronger Futures" cover similar social engineering and an enduring, insidious racism in the political elite, the bureaucracy and wider Australian society. When in 2008 prime minister Kevin Rudd apologised for the stolen generation, he added: "I want to be blunt about this. There will be no compensation." The Sydney Morning Herald congratulated Rudd on a "shrewd manoeuvre" that "cleared away a piece of political wreckage in a way that responds to some of its own supporters' emotional needs, yet changes nothing".
Today, the theft of Aboriginal children – including babies taken from the birth table – is now more widespread than at any time during the last century. As of June last year, almost 14,000 Aboriginal children had been "removed". This is five times the number when Bringing Them Home was written. More than a third of all removed children are Aboriginal – from 3% of the population. At the present rate, this mass removal of Aboriginal children will result in a stolen generation of more than 3,300 children in the Northern Territory alone.
[/quote]
[url]http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/mar/21/john-pilger-indigenous-australian-families[/url]
Holy shit. I thought they had stopped doing this?
Candle sniffing fuck fence, what exactly happens to the children? Source mentions cheap labour and slavery, but Australia doesn't sound like the sort of place to stick them in factories and sweatshops. Are they shipped off? Or is this just to fuck up indigenous families?
Weird in how it seems opposite, but equally awful, to what happens here in Canada. Instead of the government overzealously removing children from their homes like in Australia, here the government basically provides aboriginal communities with little to no access to social services and many children who [i]should[/i] be removed from abusive parents or caregivers are simply left there (or, at the very least, investigations that should be happening aren't).
[quote]Assimilation remains Australian government policy in all but name. [/quote]
sounds a bit harsh
time to get digging
The Aboriginal population is growing, which seems to counter this claim:
[quote]The Australian Bureau of Statistics 2005 census of Australian demographics showed that the Indigenous population had grown at twice the rate of the overall population since 1996 when the Indigenous population stood at 283,000. As of June 2001, the Australian Bureau of Statistics estimated the total resident Indigenous population to be 458,520 (2.4% of Australia's total), 90% of whom identified as Aboriginal, 6% Torres Strait Islander and the remaining 4% being of dual Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander parentage. [/quote]
[quote]In the 2006 Census, 407,700 respondents declared they were Aboriginal, 29,512 declared they were Torres Strait Islander, and a further 17,811 declared they were both Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders.[125] After adjustments for undercount, the indigenous population as of end June 2006 was estimated to be 517,200, representing about 2.5% of the population.[126][/quote]
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indigenous_Australians#Demographics[/url]
Intermarriage rates are high as well, so it doesn't seem like the Australian government is getting rid of Aboriginals.
[quote]Described by a chief protector of Aborigines as "breeding out the colour", the policy was known as assimilation. It was influenced by the same eugenics movement that inspired the Nazis. [/quote]
What a shit attempt to shoehorn in godwins law. The aboriginal population is at least half a million and growing.
[QUOTE=Zeke129;44313894]here the government basically provides aboriginal communities with little to no access to social services and many children who [i]should[/i] be removed from abusive parents or caregivers are simply left there (or, at the very least, investigations that should be happening aren't).[/QUOTE]
The problem is that we have to a conflict between respecting first nations self determination and actually improving their qualities of life. First-Nations governments incredibly corrupt, just look at how unfairly bands are represented and how some tribes have hereditary leaders.
What the fuck, I thought Australia was cool.
Child protection services are not a bunch of cackling racists that remove Aboriginal children to further a clandestine continuation of the assimilation policy.
[QUOTE=Zeke129;44313894]Weird in how it seems opposite, but equally awful, to what happens here in Canada. Instead of the government overzealously removing children from their homes like in Australia, here the government basically provides aboriginal communities with little to no access to social services and many children who [i]should[/i] be removed from abusive parents or caregivers are simply left there (or, at the very least, investigations that should be happening aren't).[/QUOTE]
This is is false. We used to have a institutions called residential schools where aboriginal children were taken from their parents and forced to stay at. They were horrible places filled with rape, assault, and even murder.
[url]http://www.vice.com/en_ca/read/the-wildly-depressing-history-of-canadian-residential-schools[/url]
My ex-girlfriend was metis and her mom witnessed things at the one she was taken to that no human being should ever have to experience
I like how the article tries to play aborigines as the only victims. It's unbelievably bias, the policy fucks over a lot more people than just that. Even my uncle who is white, and a good parent but was involved with social services had his first child forcibly taken away (he wasn't at all a deadbeat), and he hasn't seen her since. Also don't forget, what a lot aborigines accustomed to living on the land see as "good living conditions" is much different to what the social services sector deems as "good living conditions",
It's not a discriminatory policy, it can happen to anyone here. Probably the most sensationalist title of the week.
Live in Darwin or Alice Springs for a couple of years. You'll see why a lot of children are taken away from their biological parents, because they can not properly look after themselves let alone their children, what ever race they are is irrelevant. Race isn't an excuse to be targeted or exempt.
[QUOTE=IForgotPassword;44314433]It's not a discriminatory policy, it can happen to anyone here. Probably the most sensationalist title of the week.[/QUOTE]
The problem is the disproportionate amount of children that are indigenous who are being taken away. A third of the children that are taken away are from a demographic that only represents 3% of the population. We really need to fix that.
[quote=Article]Today, the theft of Aboriginal children – including babies taken from the birth table – is now more widespread than at any time during the last century. As of June last year, almost 14,000 Aboriginal children had been "removed". This is five times the number when Bringing Them Home was written. More than a third of all removed children are Aboriginal – from 3% of the population. At the present rate, this mass removal of Aboriginal children will result in a stolen generation of more than 3,300 children in the Northern Territory alone.[/quote]
[QUOTE=Eggy;44314542]Live in Darwin or Alice Springs for a couple of years. You'll see why a lot of children are taken away from their biological parents, because they can not properly look after themselves let alone their children, what ever race they are is irrelevant. Race isn't an excuse to be targeted or exempt.[/QUOTE]
Yep. I've lived in Cairns and the local aborigines dismantle houses to make bonfires in public parks. (The ones provided to them for free by social services).
[QUOTE=Antdawg;44314889]The problem is the disproportionate amount of children that are indigenous who are being taken away. A third of the children that are taken away are from a demographic that only represents 3% of the population. We really need to fix that.[/QUOTE]
It's disproportionate because their culture and their way of life is very different to mainstream Australians, which they do not want to change (Nor should they have to), it's incompatible with what is deemed as proper living conditions.
Just a quick general question from a non-Australian. Do you feel there's a lot of discrimination against Aborigines in both systematically and socially?
[QUOTE=Elspin;44314323]This is is false. We used to have a institutions called residential schools where aboriginal children were taken from their parents and forced to stay at. They were horrible places filled with rape, assault, and even murder.
[url]http://www.vice.com/en_ca/read/the-wildly-depressing-history-of-canadian-residential-schools[/url]
My ex-girlfriend was metis and her mom witnessed things at the one she was taken to that no human being should ever have to experience[/QUOTE]
I'm talking about the modern day, I'm well aware of residential schools and how the last one didn't close until [i]the 80s[/i], which is abhorrent. Our history is definitely just as bloody as Australia's. It just seems that today, our government has basically tried to forget that aboriginal people even exist.
Ugh this fucking country
How can we even talk about adding a mention of the indigenous in the constitution when we're still doing this shit
Wow, lot of Australia hate. There is nothing stopping Aboriginals in Australia, in fact they are given first preference for a lot of things, what's stopping them is their up bringing, petrol/glue sniffing parents aren't going to be able to raise a kid properly. There's not much Australia can do unless we have a time machine . We protect the kid but remove them from their parents, we leave the kid with the parents and they end up abusing substances too
[QUOTE=Zeke129;44315643]I'm talking about the modern day, I'm well aware of residential schools and how the last one didn't close until [i]the 80s[/i], which is abhorrent. Our history is definitely just as bloody as Australia's. It just seems that today, our government has basically tried to forget that aboriginal people even exist.[/QUOTE]
Try again, the last residential school closed in [b]1996[/b]. It was likely still active during your lifetime, and what a fucking horrifying thought that is. I would agree that the conservative government is (no surprise) trying to avoid the issue altogether though.
[QUOTE=Rangergxi;44314081]The problem is that we have to a conflict between respecting first nations self determination and actually improving their qualities of life. First-Nations governments incredibly corrupt, just look at how unfairly bands are represented and how some tribes have hereditary leaders.[/QUOTE]
The power of tribal leaders is hugely overstated, usually in an effort to make the problems plaguing reserves appear to be their own problem. Any financial assistance given to the reserves is pretty much pre-designated to be for exactly what the government wants it to be for. (Remember in the media a while back, how everyone was outraged that a reserve built a hockey rink instead of housing? Well, that money could not legally have been used for housing)
Plus, any infrastructure like water, power, roads, and stuff like housing has to go through the government first. We blame the people on reserves for having housing that falls apart within a few years, but they didn't pick the contractors. I forget who it was, Mike Holmes I believe, who basically said the kind of houses being built on reserves are not up to code at all and it's a wonder they last as long as they do.
You really can't say that these problems are due to aboriginal people abusing the self-determination we afforded them when we really haven't afforded reserves any self-determination. They definitely have far less decision-making autonomy than regular villages and towns, despite being funded and supported less. (Reserve schools for instance run on approximately one third the government funding of non-reserve schools)
[QUOTE=kaine123;44315547]Just a quick general question from a non-Australian. Do you feel there's a lot of discrimination against Aborigines in both systematically and socially?[/QUOTE]
yes
[QUOTE=kaine123;44315547]Just a quick general question from a non-Australian. Do you feel there's a lot of discrimination against Aborigines in both systematically and socially?[/QUOTE]
There is still a huge amount of discrimination against the Aboriginals. I hear it all the time in WA, whenever a robbery/beating up/school fight etc happens most people jump to "I bet they were aboriginal".
They are almost always followed around in shops by the security as well. Could be a well kept mum with her kids, they will still follow her around.
[QUOTE=Elspin;44315735]Try again, the last residential school closed in [b]1996[/b].[/QUOTE]
I'm not really sure why you're coming across as confrontational, I'm on your side here
I've never made any attempt to minimize the impact of residential schools in the past or today, despite getting a date wrong, I originally only pointed out that on reserves there is basically no access to social workers and child and family services
What were the residential schools like in the actual 80s and 90s?
[QUOTE=Zeke129;44315842]I'm not really sure why you're coming across as confrontational, I'm on your side here[/QUOTE]
I don't mean the posts to come across as angry, I'm just correcting you on the dates.
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;44315854]What were the residential schools like in the actual 80s and 90s?[/QUOTE]
Compulsory attendance ended in the late 40s, but students were still being used for manual labour up until the late 50s, and at this point they were still religious schools and often the only school available. So even if they weren't being abused anymore, they were hardly getting a proper education. The Department of Indian Affairs didn't get the authority to run the schools themselves until 1969.
As for whether or not students were still being mistreated up until the 90s, I don't really know. Information is pretty sparse for some reason.
[editline]21st March 2014[/editline]
[QUOTE=Elspin;44315857]I don't mean the posts to come across as angry, I'm just correcting you on the dates.[/QUOTE]
Apologies then, it's definitely a topic that demands a certain level of intensity when making a point
I feel like the news article is a bit biased.
The amount of benefits and support provided from the government toward Aboriginals is so large you wouldn't believe it.
I don't see how people have a problem with this.
What's the alternative? Leave neglected aborigine children where they are just because we don't want to appear 'racist' by providing them proper care? But if it were a white family in the exact same situation, it'd be acceptable just because it balances out the statistics a bit?
[QUOTE=kaine123;44315547]Just a quick general question from a non-Australian. Do you feel there's a lot of discrimination against Aborigines in both systematically and socially?[/QUOTE]
Systematically, we've made huge leaps in ending discrimination. And because the indigenous peoples were disadvantaged from systematic racism in the past, the state and federal governments now provide direct assistance to them to assist them in achieving a standard of living which is enjoyed by Anglo Australians.
Socially, we're still stuck in the past. A significant portion of the population still harbour racist tendencies, not just against Asian immigrants but against indigenous peoples as well. In fact, it was only a few weeks ago when a story made headlines of two teenage girls who racially abused a man on public transport (which was caught on camera). Apparently the man doesn't identify as being aboriginal or a Torres Strait Islander, but the point still stands as those girls had made an assumption on his race and abused him over it.
[editline]22nd March 2014[/editline]
[QUOTE=Jebus;44316043]I don't see how people have a problem with this.
What's the alternative? Leave neglected aborigine children where they are just because we don't want to appear 'racist' by providing them proper care? But if it were a white family in the exact same situation, it'd be acceptable just because it balances out the statistics a bit?[/QUOTE]
I don't think the article is focusing on the policy itself, but rather the fact that many indigenous people still live in a situation where one third of children that are taken away come from a demographic that is only 3% of the population.
At the same time cultural diversity is encouraged in a lot of places. There are a LOT of international students especially.
It's not fair to say Australia is racist, but there are racists like in every country.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.