It's not 'politically correct' to say Australia was invaded, it's history

by  Paul Daley

So, the arbiters of political correctness gone mad have apparently decided we need a quick top-up lesson on Australian Indigenous history. Or something.

It’s not quite clear what, precisely, they think.

“University of NSW students told to refer to Australia as having been ‘invaded’”, screams today’s headline in Sydney’s Daily Telegraph about a guide at the university for “appropriate language use for the history, society, naming, culture and classifications of Indigenous Australian and Torres Strait Islander people”.

Have a look at the guide and judge for yourself.

You might agree with all of it, some of it or none of it. Or you might not care either way. I’m fine with most of it and that which I’d contest if I could be bothered – such as the “Dreamings” being more appropriate than the “Dreamtime” – are neither here not there.

But, horror, the Tele warns – “students are being told to refer to Australia as having been ‘invaded’ instead of settled in a highly controversial rewriting of official Australian history”.

They even use conservative historian Keith Windschuttle and (wait for it) the Institute of Public Affairs to help make their non-case.

Highly controversial? Really? Nah.

And here we were wondering if there had been a sudden re-ignition of the“history wars” (to which Windschuttle and IPA were central) when debate over (warning, I’m about to do it) European invasion and dispossession centred on the National Museum of Australia and polarised historians between the “white blindfold” and “black armband” camps.

And over what? Some guide that might help naïve university students think before they speak about matters relating to Indigenous Australians. To my mind this would be a good thing, given the hand comparatively recent continental history has dealt Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people.

And we’d be right. Australia has largely moved on from the times under John Howard’s prime ministership when the museum was riven by acrimonious argument about how it ought to depict frontier history, and whether the murders of tens of thousands of Indigenous Australians by British soldiers and “settlers” constituted war on the colonial frontier.

An instructive starting point: Indigenous warriors who resisted invasion certainly regarded it as war, as did numerous colonial authorities including governors, not least Lachlan Macquarie – a vicious, calculated murderer of his colony’s Indigenous people.

While conservative estimates would put Indigenous deaths at the hands of soldiers, “native police”, militia, explorers, miners and farmers at 30,000, recent credible academic research indicates the figure in Queensland alone was 65,000. Although violence against Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people was most extreme in Queensland, a conservative national extrapolation potentially adds another deeply unsettling dimension to Australia’s malevolent recent history.

My starting point as a non-Indigenous person who writes about Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people and their stories, has always been to listen. To listen to the ways stories are told by Indigenous people themselves, to understand their meaning and to respect the way they view – and share – their histories.

Respect is the critical word here. And that has nothing to do with being politically correct. Respect, starting with capital-I for Indigenous (I have never met an Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander person who did not want their people thus described). Neither have I come across too many Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people (not to mention a growing number of non-Indigenous Australians) who refer to the arrival of the first fleet in 1788, and all of the ensuing extreme violence and dispossession, as anything other than “invasion”.

The growing debate around the celebration of Australia Day each 26 January (Invasion Day to many Indigenous Australians) including in the pages of this country’s more reactionary journals, indicate just how much the argument has advanced since the history wars. Such change can never, of course, evolve too fast.

“They [students] are also told it is offensive to suggest James Cook ‘discovered’ Australia,” the Tele tells us.

Get out! Where to begin?

Maybe ask the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders themselves or, indeed, the Macassans from Sulawesi with whom they traded for centuries before Cook anchored his Endeavour at Botany Bay in autumn 1770. Others, including the Dutch, might also have a view about first non-Asian contact and European “discovery”.

Yes, as the UNSW guide suggests, Cook mapped the east coast of this continent. But he hardly discovered it.

Instructively, that moment of first east coast British-Indigenous contact was signified with violence when Cook’s men shot at and wounded at least one Gweagel tribesmen. Cook took their spears and a shield. The shield, part of the British Museum’s Indigenous collection (the spoils always go to the victors), was recently the centrepiece of a display at the national museum exhibition, Encounters. The shield has a notable hole in it.

The museum reckons it’s from a lance.

But the Gweagel, who want that stolen shield permanently returned, will tell you it’s from a musket round.

I know who I believe.

Invasion of the history rewriters

By CLARISSA BYE

STUDENTS at a leading NSW university are being told to refer to Australia as having been “invaded” instead of settled in a highly controversial rewriting of official Australian history.

They are also told it is offensive to suggest James Cook “discovered” Australia and inappropriate to say the indigenous people have lived here for 40,000 years.

Instead, they should say “since the beginning of the Dreamings”.

A so-called Diversity Toolkit on indigenous terminology for University of NSW undergraduates argues that Australian history should be broken up into categories, including “pre-invasion” and “post-invasion”.

It also claims the word settlement ignores the reality of indigenous lands “being stolen”.

“Australia was not settled peacefully, it was invaded, occupied and colonised,” according to the guidelines, which are prescribed reading for some undergraduate students.

“Describing the arrival of the Europeans as a ‘settlement’ attempts to view Australian history from the shores of England rather than the shores of Australia,” the document says. “Most Aboriginal people find the use of the word ‘discovery’ offensive."

Students are also being taught the terms “Aborigines” and “Aboriginal people” are inappropriate, and they should use the term “indigenous Australian people”.

The phrase “The Dreamings” is apparently more appropriate than “Dreamtime”, because the latter tended to indicate a time period that has finished.

The accepted historical period of 40,000 years is also rejected because it “puts a limit on the occupation of Australia and tends to lend support to migration theories and anthropological assumptions”.

But historian Keith Windschuttle said the term “invasion” was wrong. “Under international law, Australia has always been regarded as a settled country according to the leading judgments in international law, both here and around the world,” he said.

“Until the law changes, there is no sound basis on which to say invaded. That is wrong.”

Institute of Public Affairs research fellow Matthew Lesh criticised the guidelines, saying they suffocate “the free flow of ideas”.

Federal Education Minister Simon Birmingham said universities “enjoy autonomy when it comes to academic concepts”, however he stressed they should be a place where “ideas are contested and open to debate”.

A UNSW spokeswoman said the guides were “commonplace” across universities.

Libraries facing 'greatest crisis' in their history

The Guardian

Nearly 350 libraries have closed in Britain over the past six years, causing the loss of almost 8,000 jobs, according to new analysis.

In a controversial move that sparked protests by authors including Philip Pullman and Zadie Smith, councils across the country have shut their reading rooms in an effort to make deep savings.

Children’s author Alan Gibbons warned the public library service faced the “greatest crisis in its history”.

The figures, obtained by the BBC English Regions data journalism team, showed that 343 libraries have shut since 2010 and another 111 closures are planned this year.


Sign up to our Bookmarks newsletter
 Read more
A further 174 libraries have been transferred to community groups and are run by an army of volunteers, while 50 have been handed to external organisations.

Gibbons, who wrote Shadow Of The Minotaur, told the BBC: “Opening hours are slashed, book stocks reduced. Volunteers are no longer people who supplement full time staff but their replacements. This constitutes the hollowing out of the service. We are in dangerous territory.”

Librarian Ian Anstice, who runs the Public Libraries News website, said the cuts were “without precedent”. He said: “Councils learnt early on how unpopular simply closing libraries is, so they have had to cut the vital service in other, less obvious ways.

“It can come across in many forms – reduced opening hours, reduced book fund, reduced maintenance and reduced staffing. In all its incarnations, it is harmful to the service, creating the risk that once-loyal users of libraries will come away disappointed and stop using them.

“Our public library system used to be envy of the world. Now it is used as a cautionary tale that librarians use worldwide to scare their colleagues.”

Four areas – Sefton in Merseyside, Brent in north-west London, Stoke-on-Trent and Sunderland – have lost more than half of their libraries since 2010, the BBC data team said.

A spokesman for the Department for Media, Culture and Sport said: “Libraries are cornerstones of their communities and are part of the fabric of our society, so it’s vital they continue to innovate in order to meet the changing demands of those they serve.

“Government is helping libraries to modernise by funding a Wi-Fi roll-out across England that has benefited more than 1,000 libraries and increasing access to digital services and e-lending.”