Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
References:
Australian case:-
Botany Bay Where Histories Meet (Maraia Nuget)
When The battle fields of Australian History (Anna Haebich)
Why we weren’t Told?
Teaching and Learning About Race
Arguing About Invasion New Frontiers (Henry Reynolds)
After Mabo Interprating Indigenous Traditions (Tim Rowse)
American Case:-
The conquest of America (Tvetan Todorov see in two
compendiums)
Stolen Continents (Ronald Wright)
The Doctrine of Discovery (Vine Deloria, Jr.)
Compare the colonization of two regions of your
choice from the point of view of land rights.
Discuss the judicial and political basis of the
introduced land ownership patterns in the two
cases.
(Australian Aborigines and American Indians land Rights Issues:
Historical Comparative Analysis)
Introduction
The selection of Australian Aborigines and American Indians for the purpose of historical
comparison and analysis is not random. It is because of the fact that they have shared some similarities
and differences in the course of history. From colonization point of view both are ‘former British
penal colonies that have evolved into federal states,’ and in fact both ‘define themselves by British
political and cultural values even as they have evolved or are evolving into multi-ethnic societies’.1
Geographically, ‘each has had to settle a large land mass that differs significantly in climate and
topography from Great Britain and northern and central Europe’.2 In the course of colonization, ‘each
country has had to confront the survival of a pre-settlement aboriginal population that has never been
fully culturally, socially, economically or legally integrated into the dominant culture’.3 In particular,
the issues of land rights as native title, is also the area of discourse among the politicians, judges, and
governors in both countries, though the ways the case had been approached varies.
It is worthy to note that elements that makes these countries distinct from one another are many
more than points of likeness. In terms of treatment to the indigenous peoples, broadly speaking, the
two countries' treated their aboriginal populations differently. Indians are central, if often tragic
players, in the American story. The British and the United States had to confront the reality of their
existence in relatively settled and sophisticated societies and to develop policies to mediate between
the Indians and the settlers, who invaded their homelands.4 In contrast, Australian aboriginal peoples
were easily subdued by the British and were quickly pushed to the margins of Australian society until
1
ROBERT HUGHES, THE FATAL SHORE 41–42 (1987).
2
Dan Tarlock, AUSTRALIAN AND UNITED STATES LAW OF ABORIGINAL
LAND RIGHTS: A COMPARATIVE PERSPECTIVE, P. 53 (------)
3
Ibid
4
1 FRANCIS PAUL PRUCHA, THE GREAT FATHER: THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT AND
THE AMERICAN INDIANS 18 (1984).
well after World War II.5 Therefore, ‘Australian aborigines were marginal players from the start of the
settlement of Australia’.6
As far as the main theme of this essay is to analyse comparatively indigenous peoples land right,
America and Australia, it is dealt with reasonable depth in the subsequent sections. However, as a sort
of introductory remark, the indigenous land rights claim, which is collective right, had been also raised
in both regions. More importantly, the dichotomies developed to legitimize ownership of land, varies
in both countries. Whereas the concept developed in case of Australia was terra nullius, which I
categorize as a political discourse and authorities point of reliance, the doctrine of discovery evolved
to extinguish Indians traditional land right, which can be categorized as a judicial adoption. But in
both doctrines the final output is to extinguish the native land titles and there upon justify and
legitimatize the conquest, i.e. two routes to one gate.
In this essay, the first section deals with…
5
See Helen Stacy & A. Dan Tarlock, The Law and Policy of Drought Response in Australia
and the United States of America: A Comparative Perspective, 4 AUSTRALIAN J. NAT. RESOURCES L. &
POL'Y 1 (1997).
6
Ibid