This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jul/04/australia-unsettled-before-the-british-came-tony-abbott-knows-better
The article has changed 3 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
| Version 1 | Version 2 |
|---|---|
| Australia 'unsettled' before the British came? Tony Abbott knows better | Australia 'unsettled' before the British came? Tony Abbott knows better |
| (about 2 months later) | |
| Tony Abbott does not need a history lesson on the colonial settlement of Australia. | Tony Abbott does not need a history lesson on the colonial settlement of Australia. |
| The prime minister knows that the Indigenous inhabitants of what became Sydney Harbour stood on the headland at that point we know as Lady Macquarie's Chair and watched the tall ships arrive. | The prime minister knows that the Indigenous inhabitants of what became Sydney Harbour stood on the headland at that point we know as Lady Macquarie's Chair and watched the tall ships arrive. |
| Abbott knows what followed, too. He knows that Europeans grabbed the traditional lands of the tribes as the pastoralists pushed further north, south and west. And he knows, too well, that British troops – and later, locally raised military units, paramilitaries and raiding parties – carried on a war with the first inhabitants that claimed, by conservative estimate, 20,000 Indigenous Australians and 2,000 colonial settlers and combatants. | Abbott knows what followed, too. He knows that Europeans grabbed the traditional lands of the tribes as the pastoralists pushed further north, south and west. And he knows, too well, that British troops – and later, locally raised military units, paramilitaries and raiding parties – carried on a war with the first inhabitants that claimed, by conservative estimate, 20,000 Indigenous Australians and 2,000 colonial settlers and combatants. |
| We know that he gets all of that because he has said so often enough – and sometimes even to his detriment among conservatives who are divided about what acknowledgment modern Australia should give to its Indigenes, not least in the constitution. | We know that he gets all of that because he has said so often enough – and sometimes even to his detriment among conservatives who are divided about what acknowledgment modern Australia should give to its Indigenes, not least in the constitution. |
| “Our climate, our land, our people, our institutions, rightly make us the envy of the Earth, except for one thing: we have never fully made peace with the first Australians. This is the stain on our soul that prime minister Paul Keating so movingly evoked at Redfern 21 years ago. We have to acknowledge that pre-1788 this land was as Aboriginal then as it is Australian now. Until we have acknowledged that we will be an incomplete nation and torn people.” | “Our climate, our land, our people, our institutions, rightly make us the envy of the Earth, except for one thing: we have never fully made peace with the first Australians. This is the stain on our soul that prime minister Paul Keating so movingly evoked at Redfern 21 years ago. We have to acknowledge that pre-1788 this land was as Aboriginal then as it is Australian now. Until we have acknowledged that we will be an incomplete nation and torn people.” |
| (Making peace, of course, tacitly acknowledges war, or at least combat. This is important, given the interpretation of benign settlement that contributes to Australian cultural narcolepsy on colonial conflict or frontier war.) | (Making peace, of course, tacitly acknowledges war, or at least combat. This is important, given the interpretation of benign settlement that contributes to Australian cultural narcolepsy on colonial conflict or frontier war.) |
| Abbott said this about Keating’s Redfern speech in federal parliament in February 2013, to the private and public consternation of some of his sympathisers who are wary of moves to recognise Indigenous Australians in the constitution – and loathe Keating. Instructively Peter Coleman, one of the judges of the prime minister’s literary awards, which include the prestigious PM's Australian history award, has disparaged the Keating speech as “dreadful”. | Abbott said this about Keating’s Redfern speech in federal parliament in February 2013, to the private and public consternation of some of his sympathisers who are wary of moves to recognise Indigenous Australians in the constitution – and loathe Keating. Instructively Peter Coleman, one of the judges of the prime minister’s literary awards, which include the prestigious PM's Australian history award, has disparaged the Keating speech as “dreadful”. |
| All of which makes Abbott's pronouncements on Thursday night about pre-European settlement of the “great southern land” (the description of the admiralty pre-1788) both mystifying and extremely reckless. | All of which makes Abbott's pronouncements on Thursday night about pre-European settlement of the “great southern land” (the description of the admiralty pre-1788) both mystifying and extremely reckless. |
| Speaking at the Australian-Melbourne Institute conference, Abbott mused on the importance of foreign investment in Australia, saying that, as a general principle, “we support foreign investment”. Nothing contentious there. | Speaking at the Australian-Melbourne Institute conference, Abbott mused on the importance of foreign investment in Australia, saying that, as a general principle, “we support foreign investment”. Nothing contentious there. |
| But he went further when he emphasised just how important that investment is. “I guess our country owes its existence to a form of foreign investment by the British government in the then unsettled or, um, scarcely settled, great southern land.” | But he went further when he emphasised just how important that investment is. “I guess our country owes its existence to a form of foreign investment by the British government in the then unsettled or, um, scarcely settled, great southern land.” |
| Unsettled or scarcely settled? | Unsettled or scarcely settled? |
| It’s difficult to justify either proposition. At the time of European arrival the continent was settled, and had been for 40,000 years, from coast to coast and through the centre, and from north to south, with peoples who had sophisticated land management systems, cultural practices and languages. Those who doubt this should read Bill Gammage's remarkable book The Greatest Estate on Earth. | It’s difficult to justify either proposition. At the time of European arrival the continent was settled, and had been for 40,000 years, from coast to coast and through the centre, and from north to south, with peoples who had sophisticated land management systems, cultural practices and languages. Those who doubt this should read Bill Gammage's remarkable book The Greatest Estate on Earth. |
| Well before white settlement the British admiralty, in secret instructions to Captain Cook – the explorer who was at the vanguard of seeking trade, settlement and, to follow the Abbott analogy, “investment” opportunity – acknowledged potential Indigenous sovereignty of the great southern land. | |
| Long before the first fleet, Cook sailed on his voyage of discovery with instructions “ … To observe the genius, temper, disposition and number of the natives, if there be any, and cultivate a friendship and alliance with them ... You are also with the consent of the natives to take possession of convenient situations in the country in the name of Great Britain. Or, if you find the country uninhabited, take possession for his Majesty.” | Long before the first fleet, Cook sailed on his voyage of discovery with instructions “ … To observe the genius, temper, disposition and number of the natives, if there be any, and cultivate a friendship and alliance with them ... You are also with the consent of the natives to take possession of convenient situations in the country in the name of Great Britain. Or, if you find the country uninhabited, take possession for his Majesty.” |
| Abbott's intentional – or otherwise – questioning of the extent of Indigenous habitation of the great southern land at the time of white settlement (or invasion) – will embolden critics of his plan to acknowledge Aboriginal Australians in the constitution. That process, which he has vowed to push ahead with in this parliament, has a long way to run – culturally and politically. | Abbott's intentional – or otherwise – questioning of the extent of Indigenous habitation of the great southern land at the time of white settlement (or invasion) – will embolden critics of his plan to acknowledge Aboriginal Australians in the constitution. That process, which he has vowed to push ahead with in this parliament, has a long way to run – culturally and politically. |
| It is hard to imagine Abbott, a PM who has long been seen as a progressive on Indigenous rights, history and recognition, was accidentally mis-speaking on such a monumental and contentious matter. | It is hard to imagine Abbott, a PM who has long been seen as a progressive on Indigenous rights, history and recognition, was accidentally mis-speaking on such a monumental and contentious matter. |
| Stay tuned. | Stay tuned. |