"Stolen Generation" Appology- A different view
Ladies and Gentleman,
Tomorrow will be a history making day for Australia. Im sure anyone who's bothering to read this will know of that. Id just like to put my 10 cents in amongst educated minds. For anyone who see's this post and feels the need to swear or turn things personal, I pity you. So please, reply to this in the spirit of good, educated and passionate (kept in check) discussion, only that
I first and foremost am a history student. Im studying modern + extension and just dropped ancient. Ive got a particular interest in Australian history, and
The History Wars. The notion of a stolen generation falls under that category.
Im sure you've all been where I have, and have been forcefed time and time again information about aboriginal or indeginous history in your class rooms. I personally was sick of it, not because of the topic, but because of how many times I studied it. When I started doing higher levels of history and my own research things changed. See alot of people sitting reading this right now have been told what has been interpreted as fact. The study of history is a discipline, and must always be revised. People interpret things differently and new sources arise and others loose their integrity.
Things can change.
My worry is that 90% of Australia's youth has been taught only one side of history in regards to the stolen generation. I was made to feel distinctly guilty about my family's past and my caucasian race. I now have an overwhelming interest in indeginous history because Ive been able to access and hear a different interpretation of "the stolen generation".
Im not about to debate that kids were foreably removed from their homes. Im also not about to debate the fact that their were issolated incidents where children were abused, be it in direct government or foster care. What I will say is that in my view, the majority of children removed were retreived out of areas of poverty, abuse and in numerous cases a lifestyle in which they surely would have died. The "half-caste" children were especially vulnerable, sexually abused by family members and often murdered.
"Stolen" children were educated, by both religious and government organisations. Given health care. Their removal was warranted in most cases. But as I previously mentioned, isolated cases existed where this may not hvae been the case. Historical records suggest only two such cases-both happening in western australia. These come straight from the Aboriginal Protection Board of Australia records.
Their integrity is still being debated.
This isnt anything old. Its still happening today, and its happened ever since then. In white, asian, aboriginal, eurasian households-it doesnt matter. Nowadays we have a thing called DOCS. And DOCS foreably removes children from their families. And children, no matter how bad the house hold was still want to be retured-its basic instinct to what your parents and family members. And yes, there are still isolated incidents of abuse, by docs and by foster families. Very recently we even had our brave men and women of the ADF working in the Northern Territory. Are the kids they removed from these harmful living conditions of abuse to be considered the next 'stolen generation'?
So where does this leave us? I think if your going to apologise to "the stolen generations", appologise to all of them. Black, white, asian or whatever combination. Because its not just limited to aboriginals or indigenous australians. Secondly, I feel it neccescary for this other side of history. These other interpretations of history need to be looked at, and thought about by everyone. Especially the board of studies. Because as Australia's youth, we have the right and neccesity to have a balanced view of our past taught to us. Being told something is fact when it is still being questioned by people who think they are right is not in our educational interest. Especially when the people in question beleive they have facts, figures and sources to back their claims.
It does paint a 'black arm band' view of Australia's history when just maybe things were not as bad as we have been led to beleive.
I praise the work of Keith Windschuttle, Geoffrey Blainey and more recently Noel Pearson. All have had articles published in the Australian by the topic, and all were very well written. Noel Pearson's was especially interesting because he is one of these children that 'were stolen'. Keith windschuttle is also due to release a book on the topic.
I guess what Im trying to say here is that perhaps this entire thing shouldnt being doused in the negative light that it is. And I beleive saying 'sorry' implies an admitance that it is negative. The wording of the apology Im yet to hear, and that might change my view. I think the board of studies needs to take a good hard long look at its history syllabus, and maybe think along the lines of implementing something a little more balanced.
Give students both sides of history and then let us decide.
As I said earlier, please reply to this only in the spirit of good, educated discussion.
Eagerly awaiting replies,
Doug