Indigenous people in the 21st century
Order Instructions:
some engagement with notions of social inequality. which you can find some suggested starting points for this essay in (sociology antipodean perspectives 2ed textbook)
#64 (‘Division’ Nikos Papastergiardis) and
#65 (‘Insiders, Outsiders’; Ghassan Hage).
SAMPLE ANSWER
In this 21st century, the number of indigenous people in the 21st century is over 300 In this 21st century, the number of indigenous people in the 21st century is over 300 million, whereby they are spread all over the world, including the Scandinavian Sami, Guatemala’s Maya, the Dalits in the South Indian mountains, the Kwei and San of South Africa, and Aboriginal people of Australia, among others. There is a great diversity among indigenous people’s communities, with each having a significant culture, history, language, and a significantly different way of life (Altman and Johnson, 2010). In spite of these diversities, these indigenous communities across the world share various values that are partly derived from the view of their lives are inseparable and part of the general natural world.
In Australia, the ancestors of the first Aborigines in the country, believed to have originally been the homeland of Aborigines. For thousands of years, they lived a peaceful, primitive, and nomadic life without the disturbance of the outsiders. Therefore, historically Australians have more aligned to think of remote living Aboriginal people through broad representation types (Altman and Johnson, 2010). During the 21st century, it is clear that the aborigines of Australia are the ultimate outsiders. This paper argues that the fact on top of discussing why they are perennial objects in regard to the Australian government attention.
Over the past two decades, the Australian approach of the Social Policy towards the indigenous people has been underlined under the overreaching goal of struggling to achieve outcome equality, while at the same time recognizing the discrepancy that is increasing (McCormick et al, 2007). Such an approach is considered as necessary because it makes it possible for an ultimatum of the rights of the indigenous citizens, which have been in play since the 1960s, as well as the recognition of the inherent rights envelope, which both highlight equality and difference. However, even in this century, there is still a disturbing extreme for the making of social policy that underlined in the norm of universalism. Indigenous people whose economic and cultural circumstances are very diverse from the dominating societies, are living on land owned by the Aborigines in Australia’s remotest parts and are engaging in significantly diverse customary economies (McCormick et al, 2007). This is a very problematic extreme, especially within the reform welfare context, which has placed so much emphasis on mutual obligation since the ‘striving for equality of measured outcomes’ milestone might never be realized or be seen as appropriate in a setting that views the Aborigines as outsiders in the 21st century Australia.
Apart from the historical legacy that makes the Aborigines to viewed that way, this status is also contributed to significantly by two factors. The first one is that they reside in localities that are extremely remote considered to be “beyond the market’, which makes these localities susceptible to geographically-remote localities lacking viable markets of labor; and secondly, due to the significantly high-levels of commitment in the non-market or customary economy that results due to concrete cultural continuities – partly due to relatively benign and late histories (Levitus, 2011). As a result, in the 21st century, Aboriginals are represented as the outsiders in the Australian context due to the picture that is attached to them by default. First, they are pictured as outsiders due to the cultural discrepancies even if in positive terms – gatherers and hunters who have vibrant artistic and ceremonial traditions, and whose language is very distinct coupled with the fact they live off the land (Levitus, 2011). Secondly, they are viewed as outsiders in this perspective because their cultural differences are significantly viewed as negatively driving them away from the common population. In the critical view of the typical Australian, their cultural discrepancies are more of savage and repugnant practices, characterized with anti-modern (anti-21st century) tendencies, and they are generally depicted as improvised social outcasts of the modern age. Despite the fact that they have existed through history of Australia, large and by, it is clear that just a particular kind of image has been dominant all through – they are the modern-day Australia outsiders (Levitus, 2011).
It is largely due to the reasons outlined concerning why they are the ultimate outsiders in the 21st century Australia that help to better explain why they are the perennial objects of Australian Government attention (Megaw, 2006b). The government views it as an informed move to intervene through the introduction of new policies for the policy regarding the indigenous people. Mainly it is in an effort to change their being viewed as outsiders. The government attention cannot be mentioned as romanticist or dilettantish and can be generalized in several observations. The first one is the combination of native title and land rights as well as increasing the possibility of the recognition of the Aboriginal rights, and making sure that they are not habitats to such remote localities in the future. Secondly, the government attention can be viewed in terms of trying to improve the robust living conditions in such localities and increase the state penetration, globalization and the labor market. Thirdly, as a result of the recent debate regarding the social policy that is underlined by the rubric of mutual obligation, it is crucial for the government to act as a the key player it is in improving on the social participation degree that is well established already, to cater for these indigenous and remote communities like Aboriginals for this matter.
The government consideration of the Aboriginals as perennial objects can be argued in terms of increasing self-determination and self-management. In this century especially, the commonwealth policy has been based on this declaration: ‘the fundamental right of Aboriginals to retain their racial identity and traditional lifestyle or, where desired, to adopt wholly or partially a European lifestyle,” (Coombs, Dexter and Hiatt, 2010; p. 21). The government is promoting the initiative on Aboriginal control or participation in community or local government, as well as the other concerned areas to encourage them from living in the conceptualities that ultimately label them as outsiders. This approach was previously conceived as self-determination and self-management, and recently the government support has been the latest positive investment in programs that are managed by Aboriginal organizations. For instance, the Aboriginal Development Commission has been string than ever in the 21st century advent, whereby it is positively assisting social and economic development of Aboriginal people, through promotion of their self-management and development as well as increasing the economic self-sufficiency of the Aboriginal people (Coombs, Dexter and Hiatt, 2010). The government involvement in the general view is to ensure that the Aboriginals are at the same social and economic front with their counterparts.
In general, the Aboriginal are viewed as outsiders in the 21st century Australia because of the remote localities and deprived social, cultural and economic welfare. The reason they are they are the perennial objects of Australian Government attention is because the government wants to change these statuses and ensure this is not their position in the country anymore (Megaw, 2006b).
References
Altman, J.C. and V. Johnson (2010), ‘CDEP in town and country Arnhem Land: Bawinanga Aboriginal Corporation’, CAEPR Discussion Paper No. 209, Centre for Aboriginal Economic Policy Research, Australian National University, Canberra.
Coombs, H. C., B. G. Dexter and L. R. Hiatt (2010), ‘The outstations movement in Aboriginal Australia’, Australian Institute of Aboriginal Studies Newsletter, 14, 16– 23.
Levitus, R. (2011), Aboriginal Development and Self Determination: Policy, Distancing and Articulation, unpublished manuscript, Centre for Aboriginal Economic Policy Research, Australian National University, Canberra https://press.anu.edu.au/publications/series/centre-aboriginal-economic-policy-research-caepr
McCormick, T., R. Irving, E. Imashev, J. Nelson & G. Bull, (2007). First Views of Australia 1788-1825: a History of Early Sydney. David Ell Press in association with Longueville Publications, Chippindale, NSW
Megaw, J.V.S., 2006b. Australian archaeology – how far have we progress.
We can write this or a similar paper for you! Simply fill the order form!
