14th January 2008, 05:06 PM
Mr Hosty!
Do you think it would be a good idea for a thread on issues in Australian, or in fact, other countries where Archaeologist deal with the study of Indigenous peoples? In Oz the issue of white euro decended archaeologists rummaging about in other peoples (read indigenous) business has always been a bit of an issue. In many cases archaeologists pride themselves on the trust they earn while working with and for various communities.
The would point out that the majority of Ozzies are well aware of previous injusts done to aboriginal peoples. The stolen generation was the result of a general government policy of removing 'half cast' children from their communities. The policy was based on the belief that aboriginals as a race would eventually become extinct and there was a duty to raise these children within white society. Children were removed forcibly based on the colour of their skin. There is some evidence that a few aboriginal communities didn't want children that were fathered by whites. All very complex and against a background of growing interest in eugenics (think 1930's and 40's).
Issues of substance abuse and domestic violence (amongst aboriginal) always seem to dominate the news as is the current media atention with child abuse in various communities. This clouds opinions on aboriginals markedly and hence the red-neck brigade. The issue of Europeans writing history based on documented evidence is another issue. Aboriginals have an oral record of traditions and history which is difficult to use in a system that bases/requires evidence on writen history (it takes little imagination to see the issues in Courts dealing with land rights claims, especially when oral traditions conflict amongst communities over land ownership).
Just a couple of things to think on.
Do you think it would be a good idea for a thread on issues in Australian, or in fact, other countries where Archaeologist deal with the study of Indigenous peoples? In Oz the issue of white euro decended archaeologists rummaging about in other peoples (read indigenous) business has always been a bit of an issue. In many cases archaeologists pride themselves on the trust they earn while working with and for various communities.
The would point out that the majority of Ozzies are well aware of previous injusts done to aboriginal peoples. The stolen generation was the result of a general government policy of removing 'half cast' children from their communities. The policy was based on the belief that aboriginals as a race would eventually become extinct and there was a duty to raise these children within white society. Children were removed forcibly based on the colour of their skin. There is some evidence that a few aboriginal communities didn't want children that were fathered by whites. All very complex and against a background of growing interest in eugenics (think 1930's and 40's).
Issues of substance abuse and domestic violence (amongst aboriginal) always seem to dominate the news as is the current media atention with child abuse in various communities. This clouds opinions on aboriginals markedly and hence the red-neck brigade. The issue of Europeans writing history based on documented evidence is another issue. Aboriginals have an oral record of traditions and history which is difficult to use in a system that bases/requires evidence on writen history (it takes little imagination to see the issues in Courts dealing with land rights claims, especially when oral traditions conflict amongst communities over land ownership).
Just a couple of things to think on.
