It being NAIDOC week, and us all talking about the voice to parliament, treaties and so forth, it's only fair that I should write a review of Sarah Maddison's book, The Colonial Fantasy: Why White Australia Can't Solve Black Problems.
Sarah Maddison is Professor of Politics at the University of Melbourne. She is not an Indigenous person, but she has written and researched extensively on Indigenous politics and a good deal of this book consists of direct quotes from Indigenous authors and leaders. She doesn't claim to represent or speak for Aboriginal people. She is careful to represent the diversity of Indigenous views rather than pretend to consensus. Still, her extensive quotes show at least that there is no shortage of Indigenous people who share her view, even if others have a different opinion.
Why, she asks, after decades of debate and effort, are we not succeeding in solving the issues of inequality that face Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities? Her answer, in a nutshell, is that responses are driven by a fantasy of 'colonial completion' - the idea that the British colonisation of Australia can be completed, with Indigenous Australians incorporated fully into European society with nothing distinctive remaining.
Earlier in Australian history this fantasy involved the idea that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples would eventually die out, giving way to superior European peoples. This idea drove the massacres and dispossessions and, once the initial frontier violence was over, the practice of confining Aboriginal people to reserves. In more recent years, as it became clear that they would not in fact die out, it has transformed into various forms of assimilation - the idea that Aboriginal people can and should just become 'like everyone else'.
This is a problem for a number of reasons. First of all, it attempts to blot out the cultural differences between Indigenous and settler communities. It says to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples, 'you can only become equal at the cost of changing who you are'. Hence it fails to recognise, or actively refuses, the aspirations of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples to sustain their cultures, languages and laws.
Secondly, it attempts to whitewash injustice. It acts on the assumption - explicit or implicit - that the injustices of our history need not be righted and have no bearing on the present, or that they are outweighed by the benefits of colonisation. But this is plainly untrue - there is a direct link between the violence of dispossession (stolen land, stolen children, stolen wages) and the current levels of poverty and trauma in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities. It leads, logically but falsely, to the implication that Indigenous people are to blame for their own poverty and poor health, that there is an 'Aboriginal problem' rather than the 'settler problem' Aboriginal people actually have.
Thirdly, it does not and cannot work, as we have seen repeatedly.
Drawing on both Australian and international research, Maddison suggests that self-determination is not simply a nice idea, but a necessary precondition to improvements in Indigenous lives. Indigenous communities around the world do much better when they have formal treaties, authority within their own domain and the ability to generate and manage their own resources. Where these preconditions are resisted or neglected attempts to solve social problems are unlikely to succeed.
This self-determination is what Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities have asked for, demanded and attempted to take for themselves repeatedly for the past century or more, and what the Australian settler state has repeatedly refused. Maddison presents these demands under four headings - recognition, self-determination, representation and land.
When Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples ask for these things they are either refused outright, or grudgingly allowed part of what they ask for. After decades of discussion we do not have constitutional recognition or a treaty. Local self government and the one attempt at a national representative body, the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission, have been done on terms set by the colonial government and can be cancelled at the stroke of a pen, as ATSIC was by the Howard government. Native Title, won through the courts against strong government resistance, prompted legislation primarily aimed at limiting its practical effect.
Instead, the main responses by Australian governments have essentially been continuations of the colonial project - intervention, incarceration, 'closing the gap' and reconciliation. The response to the Little Children are Sacred report, documenting child abuse on remote Northern Territory communities, was the Intervention. This policy cancelled what self-government remained in these communities, upped the level of bureaucratic intervention in daily life, quarantined welfare payments and generally saw a resurgence of paternalism. This was done despite, not because of, the inquiry itself which identified greater self-determination as an essential precondition to addressing the problem. Tragically but unsurprisingly after more than a decade there has been no discernible improvement in abuse rates. Yet there is no sign of either side of politics seriously considering a change of direction.
Other responses are no more effective - 25 years after the Royal Commission into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody few of the recommendations have been implemented and more Indigenous people are in prison than ever. A decade into the 'Closing the Gap' strategy the 'gap' remains stubbornly wide. In each case, the absence of self-determination makes the chosen strategies ineffective and even counter-productive.
Even the process of Reconciliation, supported by many Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people and showing such promise with huge popular marches in capital cities in 2000, is presented in Maddison's analysis as a more benign form of this same pattern. Rather than a treaty, restitution or self-determination the process of reconciliation (which the Hawke government commenced after reneging on its promise of a treaty) attempts to negotiate the completion of colonialism. It asks Indigenous people to accept an apology, forgive and then move on. Kevin Rudd's belated apology to the stolen generations, valuable and appreciated in itself, was couched as an attempt to put these things in the past. Aboriginal people were addressed as 'fellow Australians' and the apology ruled out any form of compensation or reparation. It was the colonial fantasy dressed in Aboriginal colours.
Where does this leave us? Maddison has reached the conclusion that well-intentioned progressive policies (which she herself has previously championed) will not help Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples to achieve their aspirations. The only people who can solve Indigenous problems are Indigenous peoples themselves. This is because they are not really Indigenous problems, they are colonial problems. The best the colonisers can do, even those who are supportive of Indigenous aspirations, is to get out of the way.
Secondly, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples do not achieve success by waiting for governments to give them what they ask for. They achieve it by taking it for themselves. Eddie Mabo gained Native Title for his own people and others by fighting governments all the way to the High Court, not by asking politely. This week we have seen the same in Queensland with the resolution of the long-running legal fight for the return of stolen wages. Left to itself, the Queensland Government would never have agreed to a settlement of nearly $200m, and even then this is less than half of the actual amount stolen.
At a local or regional level, many Aboriginal leaders are questioning the project of seeking recognition from the colonial government. If sovereignty has never been ceded, they don't need anyone's permission to run their own affairs in their own way. So we are seeing an emerging movement of people and communities around the country acting on their own initiative, taking control of their affairs without waiting for permission.
Of course this is not an 'either/or'. Colonial governments can always legislate to override self-determination, and to overturn court orders. This is why Aboriginal people want their representation enshrined in the constitution, not merely in law, and why they want treaties not merely policies. The point is that they are increasingly recognising that to get what they want, they need to take the initiative and let government respond as it will.
What this book provides is a framework within which we can listen to the debates and discussions around Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander affairs. When we hear, for instance, politicians saying they don't support an Indigenous voice to parliament because it will 'divide the nation', we can hear the desire for colonial completion, the fantasy that Indigenous peoples can and should become 'just like us'. As if the nation were not already divided!
When we hear people decrying discussions about the place of Australia Day/Invasion Day in Australia because it is more urgent to address family violence, we can see the assumption that these issues are unconnected, that ultimately the process of colonisation is not important. Not important, that is, unless some unpatriotic soul suggests that we should stop celebrating it.
Parker Palmer suggests that in a healthy democracy issues are never finally and completely 'resolved'. This would require totalitarianism. A future government can always undo the work of a current or past one. Important debates never truly go away. Nonetheless it is possible to make progress, particularly if we work carefully and patiently to change people's hearts and minds.
This seems to be an issue where this insight is particularly pertinent. That the colonial project remains incomplete is no bad thing. The ongoing tension between Indigenous and non-Indigenous people can be a productive tension, a reminder that there are wrongs to be righted, that sovereignty was actually not ceded, that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people will not be going anywhere. This will always make us non-Indigenous people uncomfortable but the solution to the very real problems facing Indigenous communities lies not in erasing this discomfort but allowing it to be a spur for us to do better, to listen more carefully, and to allow Indigenous communities to get on with their business with our blessing rather than continuing to frustrate them.
Self-determination would not be the end of the story either. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples are no more perfect than the rest of us. They will make mistakes, they will commit injustices just as we do. But without this shift of power and control into their hands, things will never change, we will keep going round and round the same old cycle of policy failure. Us white people think we have the answers but history tells us we don't. It's time to stop pretending otherwise, and change course. Surely it won't be worse than what we are doing now!
Sarah Maddison is Professor of Politics at the University of Melbourne. She is not an Indigenous person, but she has written and researched extensively on Indigenous politics and a good deal of this book consists of direct quotes from Indigenous authors and leaders. She doesn't claim to represent or speak for Aboriginal people. She is careful to represent the diversity of Indigenous views rather than pretend to consensus. Still, her extensive quotes show at least that there is no shortage of Indigenous people who share her view, even if others have a different opinion.Why, she asks, after decades of debate and effort, are we not succeeding in solving the issues of inequality that face Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities? Her answer, in a nutshell, is that responses are driven by a fantasy of 'colonial completion' - the idea that the British colonisation of Australia can be completed, with Indigenous Australians incorporated fully into European society with nothing distinctive remaining.
Earlier in Australian history this fantasy involved the idea that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples would eventually die out, giving way to superior European peoples. This idea drove the massacres and dispossessions and, once the initial frontier violence was over, the practice of confining Aboriginal people to reserves. In more recent years, as it became clear that they would not in fact die out, it has transformed into various forms of assimilation - the idea that Aboriginal people can and should just become 'like everyone else'.
This is a problem for a number of reasons. First of all, it attempts to blot out the cultural differences between Indigenous and settler communities. It says to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples, 'you can only become equal at the cost of changing who you are'. Hence it fails to recognise, or actively refuses, the aspirations of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples to sustain their cultures, languages and laws.
Secondly, it attempts to whitewash injustice. It acts on the assumption - explicit or implicit - that the injustices of our history need not be righted and have no bearing on the present, or that they are outweighed by the benefits of colonisation. But this is plainly untrue - there is a direct link between the violence of dispossession (stolen land, stolen children, stolen wages) and the current levels of poverty and trauma in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities. It leads, logically but falsely, to the implication that Indigenous people are to blame for their own poverty and poor health, that there is an 'Aboriginal problem' rather than the 'settler problem' Aboriginal people actually have.
Thirdly, it does not and cannot work, as we have seen repeatedly.
Drawing on both Australian and international research, Maddison suggests that self-determination is not simply a nice idea, but a necessary precondition to improvements in Indigenous lives. Indigenous communities around the world do much better when they have formal treaties, authority within their own domain and the ability to generate and manage their own resources. Where these preconditions are resisted or neglected attempts to solve social problems are unlikely to succeed.
This self-determination is what Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities have asked for, demanded and attempted to take for themselves repeatedly for the past century or more, and what the Australian settler state has repeatedly refused. Maddison presents these demands under four headings - recognition, self-determination, representation and land.
When Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples ask for these things they are either refused outright, or grudgingly allowed part of what they ask for. After decades of discussion we do not have constitutional recognition or a treaty. Local self government and the one attempt at a national representative body, the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission, have been done on terms set by the colonial government and can be cancelled at the stroke of a pen, as ATSIC was by the Howard government. Native Title, won through the courts against strong government resistance, prompted legislation primarily aimed at limiting its practical effect.
Instead, the main responses by Australian governments have essentially been continuations of the colonial project - intervention, incarceration, 'closing the gap' and reconciliation. The response to the Little Children are Sacred report, documenting child abuse on remote Northern Territory communities, was the Intervention. This policy cancelled what self-government remained in these communities, upped the level of bureaucratic intervention in daily life, quarantined welfare payments and generally saw a resurgence of paternalism. This was done despite, not because of, the inquiry itself which identified greater self-determination as an essential precondition to addressing the problem. Tragically but unsurprisingly after more than a decade there has been no discernible improvement in abuse rates. Yet there is no sign of either side of politics seriously considering a change of direction.
Other responses are no more effective - 25 years after the Royal Commission into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody few of the recommendations have been implemented and more Indigenous people are in prison than ever. A decade into the 'Closing the Gap' strategy the 'gap' remains stubbornly wide. In each case, the absence of self-determination makes the chosen strategies ineffective and even counter-productive.
Even the process of Reconciliation, supported by many Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people and showing such promise with huge popular marches in capital cities in 2000, is presented in Maddison's analysis as a more benign form of this same pattern. Rather than a treaty, restitution or self-determination the process of reconciliation (which the Hawke government commenced after reneging on its promise of a treaty) attempts to negotiate the completion of colonialism. It asks Indigenous people to accept an apology, forgive and then move on. Kevin Rudd's belated apology to the stolen generations, valuable and appreciated in itself, was couched as an attempt to put these things in the past. Aboriginal people were addressed as 'fellow Australians' and the apology ruled out any form of compensation or reparation. It was the colonial fantasy dressed in Aboriginal colours.
Where does this leave us? Maddison has reached the conclusion that well-intentioned progressive policies (which she herself has previously championed) will not help Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples to achieve their aspirations. The only people who can solve Indigenous problems are Indigenous peoples themselves. This is because they are not really Indigenous problems, they are colonial problems. The best the colonisers can do, even those who are supportive of Indigenous aspirations, is to get out of the way.
Secondly, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples do not achieve success by waiting for governments to give them what they ask for. They achieve it by taking it for themselves. Eddie Mabo gained Native Title for his own people and others by fighting governments all the way to the High Court, not by asking politely. This week we have seen the same in Queensland with the resolution of the long-running legal fight for the return of stolen wages. Left to itself, the Queensland Government would never have agreed to a settlement of nearly $200m, and even then this is less than half of the actual amount stolen.
At a local or regional level, many Aboriginal leaders are questioning the project of seeking recognition from the colonial government. If sovereignty has never been ceded, they don't need anyone's permission to run their own affairs in their own way. So we are seeing an emerging movement of people and communities around the country acting on their own initiative, taking control of their affairs without waiting for permission.
Of course this is not an 'either/or'. Colonial governments can always legislate to override self-determination, and to overturn court orders. This is why Aboriginal people want their representation enshrined in the constitution, not merely in law, and why they want treaties not merely policies. The point is that they are increasingly recognising that to get what they want, they need to take the initiative and let government respond as it will.
What this book provides is a framework within which we can listen to the debates and discussions around Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander affairs. When we hear, for instance, politicians saying they don't support an Indigenous voice to parliament because it will 'divide the nation', we can hear the desire for colonial completion, the fantasy that Indigenous peoples can and should become 'just like us'. As if the nation were not already divided!
When we hear people decrying discussions about the place of Australia Day/Invasion Day in Australia because it is more urgent to address family violence, we can see the assumption that these issues are unconnected, that ultimately the process of colonisation is not important. Not important, that is, unless some unpatriotic soul suggests that we should stop celebrating it.
Parker Palmer suggests that in a healthy democracy issues are never finally and completely 'resolved'. This would require totalitarianism. A future government can always undo the work of a current or past one. Important debates never truly go away. Nonetheless it is possible to make progress, particularly if we work carefully and patiently to change people's hearts and minds.
This seems to be an issue where this insight is particularly pertinent. That the colonial project remains incomplete is no bad thing. The ongoing tension between Indigenous and non-Indigenous people can be a productive tension, a reminder that there are wrongs to be righted, that sovereignty was actually not ceded, that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people will not be going anywhere. This will always make us non-Indigenous people uncomfortable but the solution to the very real problems facing Indigenous communities lies not in erasing this discomfort but allowing it to be a spur for us to do better, to listen more carefully, and to allow Indigenous communities to get on with their business with our blessing rather than continuing to frustrate them.
Self-determination would not be the end of the story either. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples are no more perfect than the rest of us. They will make mistakes, they will commit injustices just as we do. But without this shift of power and control into their hands, things will never change, we will keep going round and round the same old cycle of policy failure. Us white people think we have the answers but history tells us we don't. It's time to stop pretending otherwise, and change course. Surely it won't be worse than what we are doing now!
Comments
. The head of the 'Closing the Gap' ?committee/umbrella group whose name I have forgotten (older very well known woman originally from Alice)would probably have some problems as she was adamant that closing the gap was working.
Did I ever mentioned I was privileged to meet Yami Lester and Mrs Lester in my Alice days. It's a bit funny as it was at parent teacher interviews as I taught their son Leroy, a nice cheeky boy Indonesian! Not totally stupid teaching Indo in Alice but it would have been good if all the schools had taught local languages. I started to learn Pitjantjatjara when I arrived but got too busy to cont.
Anyway a bit of a rave but I did some solid reading of the issues in my year there.