the Indigenous Gap

Various people in are often going on about the "gap" between Indigenous Australia and the rest of Australia, the latest referendum by the Government is intended to bring this recognition to the constitution.

As a non-indigenous but (depending on the branch you follow) 5th generation Australian I would ask if this "gap" is not in some ways of the Indigenous Communitys own making.

While there is totally no doubt in my mind that through history various Colonial and Post Federation (but still perhaps Colonial in thinking) governments have done much wrong (such as unpaid wages) to the Indigenous Community, it should be pointed out that the rest of the country gets its fair share of being ripped off too.

To me the main source of "gap" seems to be leveled at indicators such as health (mental and physical) and life expectancy. There is little doubt that these indicators do indeed show a large difference between the people who call themselves Aboriginal and those who do not.

As I see it, this would seem to be something which is exactly created by the life choices that Aboriginal people make. The places they choose to live in and the lifestyles they choose to lead.

A case in point was the recent rampaging community that spilled out of Yuendumu over into South Australia. The violence was about payback for killings, something which is variously illegal, condemned and the source of all the strife in the middle east.

It seems that the first death (which started the bloody vengance) was sparked by claims that a fella who died of cancer was in fact killed by another "witch doctor" who cast a spell on him.

yeah, right. Pull the other one, that plays Jingle bells.


At present anyone who applies for a job in Government (local, State or Federal) will know that there is actually positive discrimination towards Aboriginal and Torres Straight Islanders built into the application process. In other words the system actually stacks against non-indigenous people.

Even Noel Pearson has made statements that recognize the comprehensive failure of the Indigenous community to even properly raise and care for their own.

I would argue that if Aboriginal People joined the modern world, and lived as the rest of us do that this gap would disappear.

I would be very interested to hear from anyone in the community who can clearly make a case to me that there remains any significant gap which is not in the favor of Indigenous peoples that is not contributed to by them.

Time moves on ... I know its hard to change values, and there are certainly many existing values within mainstream society in Australia which need changing. However as I see it we stand to gain more as a society by coming together and working towards a future together than by working on perpetuation of division. I can not see anything in "Indigenous Recognition" which does anything other than perpetuate that division.

Can you?

Australia day 2009

I was reading today in The Australian, that Mick Dodson (a man I admire for taking leadership and personal interest in Aboriginal issues in Australia) has said that

To many indigenous Australians, in fact most indigenous Australians, it really reflects the day in which our world came crashing down

I think this is a fair comment with quite a ring of truth about it. He goes further to say that

Many of our people call it Invasion Day, but I think Australia is mature enough now to have a conversation about that, and let's get on with it, like we usually do.

So I'd like to participate in that mature conversation and begin by raising with the following points which I think need to be considered as a premise:

• while for much of human history (certainly western recorded history) Australia remained isolated geographically, this situation was not going to remain so forever.
  
• there is some suggestion that there have previously been indigenous human inhabitants in Australia genetically different to the indigenous inhabitants met by Cook and the English explorers.
  
• certainly much of the actions of the early colonists (and colonial government) was reprehensible and distasteful to us today (perhaps even then). However this is perhaps only so from particular religious view points (such as Christian and perhaps Buddhist views), certainly fights over territory are nothing new in human history and the losers of such disputes can face either death, slavery or (if lucky) assimilation.
• choice of words is not accidental, so invasion or colonisation or migration or displacement are all words which could apply but which need to be thought about carefully (unless we're not after intelligent discussion, but rather a screaming match).
• everyone and every culture undergoes change, like it or not we are exposed to other humans eventually
• what would it have been like if the other culture which encountered Australia and spread its influence into there was any other culture (say Chinese, Japanese, or even something like the Assyrian or Roman cultures)

So as well as dealing with what has gone on, lets not loose sight of the fact that at some stage the Indigenous people of Australia were going to meet other humans. Because they had not been developing (and exploring outside of their world) it was likely someone else of greater technical skills was going to be the explorer.

No matter what, their world would be changed forever. But then our world (the entire planet) has been changed several times over, so perhaps we've just had a little more experience in getting used to changes (maybe).

So, indigenous people can remain in the stone age if they choose (and I think there exists room for that, although some leaders Mr Dodson among them hold that they should not) and accept the attendant limitations of that choice (such as access to medical educational and other modern resources). Perhaps we can even provided a sheltered location for them, away from exploitation of our culture or those from their culture who would seek to exploit them.

However if you want to modernize then like it or not you must accept the limitations of our existing culture and join with it. From that point you can attempt to steer it (as does anyone else) through the channels available such as politics, science and academic inputs.

You will however need to persuade people and provide acceptable alternatives.

No matter what, life is never static for long so you may as well get used to change.

tolerance

I was reading the Australian today, and noticed this article. I'll take the liberty of quoting here:

THE publisher of a book that contains a section teaching girls how to play the didgeridoo will remove the offending chapter after claims it had made a cultural faux pas.

The Daring Book for Girls, set to be published by HarperCollins in October, attracted criticism from indigenous commentators over a chapter which teaches girls how to play the didgeridoo.

Academic and Aboriginal education advocate Dr Mark Rose said it was an "extreme faux pas" on the part of HarperCollins as cultural protocols around the instrument include a ban on females touching or playing it.


Which suggests that there is no cultural tolerance for people outside of their cultural frame of reference to do as they please. When does this cease to be a matter of respect of differences and a matter of tolerance?

If we can tolerate Jesus in a jar of piss then perhaps some other cultures could learn to be tolerant too?

I know that in Australia we've come from the english settlers and colonists being intolerant of the "Black Fellas", should we move towards intolerance again?