Comparison of Assimilation Policy and Kevin Rudd's National Apology to the Stolen Generations in Australian History

This essay compares the Assimilation Policy and Kevin Rudd's National Apology to the Stolen Generations in Australian history, highlighting similarities and differences in goals, norms, and impact on indigenous culture and society.

Comparative Essay of two
event from Australian History

TABLE OF CONTENTS
REFERENCES................................................................................................................................7

The essay is about comparison of policy and event that has taken place in Australia. The
policy that is being addressed in the essay is Assimilation policy which means that according to
Australian Government aborigines and part aborigines are required to follow same culture which
was followed by other Australians and will be given same rights, privileges, responsibilities, etc.
that are being enjoyed by Australians. On the other hand the event that is being discussed in the
essay is Kevin Rudd’s National Apology to the Stolen Generations. The event is regarding the
apology of Prime minister Kevin Rudd to stolen generation for the mistakes made by past
government policies of forcing child removal and assimilation. The essay will highlight
similarities and differences in goals of both policy and event along with this it will include how
norms associated with policy and event are giving understanding regarding culture of Australian
history.
The Assimilation policy are based on the idea to reduce the cultural diversity within the
country by forcing the immigrants to adopt language, customs and value of national majority and
to completely restrain their own culture. The immigrants that were focused in this policy were
aborigines and part aborigines. Children were taken away from their families so that the
aborigines' society can be destructed as they were abided to adopt culture of Australia. The
policy was imposed in 1962 and aborigines children with fair skin were placed in institutions
where they were trained to take place in white society (Phillips and Osmond, 2018). Whereas,
Kevin Rudd’s National Apology to the Stolen Generations is the event where the stolen
generation who are aborigines and Torres strait islander people who were taken away from their
families when they were children which broke important culture of these people and society. The
event took place in 2008 where Kevin apologized to these people and promised to take measures
to protect their culture and society. The announcement for apology was made in Dec, 2007 and it
was also added that the words for apology will be decided by leaders of aborigines.
A committee was made to protect the rights of aborigines in Australia and make
involvement of aborigines affairs. The decline of population of aborigines were a very big
concern and committee focused on this by given responsibilities and rights to people and
upbringing of this society and people (Ellinghaus, 2022). The focus of government was only on
providing rights to Indigenous but has forgotten to look into restrain of value and culture of
these people and society. Basic assumption of the policy was that Indigenous people were
willing to adapt the culture and value of white people in terms of living, customs and beliefs. The

apology event has given rights to indigenous people to follow their own culture and values and
injustice that was faced by these people were removed. The gap that was made due to the
imposition of policy was removed in context to eduction, life expectancy and economic
opportunities (Shivadas, 2019). They will be provided with equal respect, mutual resolve and
mutual responsibilities that were given to Australians. Kevin also added in his apology that
Australians whatever their origin may be will be given equal responsibilities and opportunities in
shaping next chapter in history and given a better history to children and society.
The similarities that was highlighted in policy and event was that both gave opportunities
to indigenous people and has focused on declining population and common wealth authority has
taken steps for development of area by improving funding. The improvement in health,
education and employment was also focused on. Difference is that policy aim was to make
homogeneous culture by restraining the culture and value of indigenous people. The common
wealth authority had tried make development in context to health, education and economy, but
they didn't focus to protect the culture of these people rather they forced them to adapt general
culture of Australia (Davidson, 2021). Apology was made by prime minister as he was aware
that the policy imposed by past government had resulted into loss to indigenous people and the
culture was diminishing. To protect the rights and culture of aborigines the apology was made on
behalf of government and various steps were taken to protect and give opportunities to
indigenous people to develop various culture in Australia.
The past culture of aborigines were that the female usually provided staple food supply,
men used to play a vital role in nourishing teaching their children. The imposition of
Assimilation policy has made their culture and value diminishing and their culture were only
studied in history (Ellinghaus, 2018). Government of Australia were focused on making
homogenous culture but restraining traditional culture that were present in country and forced
traditional people who were living in Australia for very long time to adapt the modern culture
and to make their place in white people. The history regarding the policy give an idea that
indigenous people have faced lot of injustice and discrimination as general culture of Australian
were imposed on them by taking away their children and placing them at different institution to
train them with white culture and increase the population of white people. This imposition of
policy has created a balanced image of Australian history as common wealth authority had
focused on developing the area of indigenous people, but they didn't focus on protecting their

culture and value (Wolny, 2018). The development in education, health and economy shows a
positive image of the policy on the same hand forgetting the protection of culture and value of
aborigines give a negative impact of this policy on indigenous people.
It can also be noticed that prime minister has realized that the policy implemented in
country had a negative impact on life and culture of indigenous people and it had abandoned the
rights of people living in Australia. Therefore, to correct the misconduct that was done by past
government policies, Kevin had announced to give apology to aborigines and give them general
rights that were given to everyone living in Australia. The government had also apologized for
loss that were caused due to this policy and had promised to take corrective steps to bring the
traditional culture back and give identity to these people (Nelson and et.al., 2018). The policy
and event has given an understanding of traditional culture and history of Australia and sharing
of knowledge regarding this has shaped an understanding regarding Australian present and past
culture. Racialism has created an unremitting gap between indigenous and non indigenous
people of Australia. The racialism on the basis of culture and colour has divided people of
Australia in two parts and culture and imposition of assimilation policy has enforced indigenous
people to adapt the culture of white as government wanted to create homogeneous culture and
this created gap between black and white people living in country (Sharples and Blair, 2021).
Children of indigenous people were separated from their family, and they were kept separate to
train them the culture of white and place them with white people. The racialism has negatively
impacted the culture and history of Australia as well as aborigines. They had to face lot of
discrimination and loss due to assimilation policy. The racialization has impacted the basic
human rights of indigenous people as they were forced to restraint their own culture and this has
resulted into diminishing population of aborigines.
Both the policy and event had indulged a good understanding related to culture, history
and government of Australia. Indigenous and aborigines had suffered a lot due to the imposition
of assimilation policy which has negatively impacted their living and culture. The discrimination
in Australia on the basis of colour and cast has divided people into two parts and white people
have domination. This domination had negatively influenced life of indigenous people as they
were forced to adapt the culture of white people and restraint from their traditional culture. The
common wealth authority had tried for development but their focus was not on culture and value
development. Therefore, development of policy had negative influence and people tried to

oppose such policy. For restoring the damages made due to assimilation policy current
government has give apology and had taken measures to protect human rights of aborigines
people and give every individual equal opportunities to build cultural and developed country.
The policy had made me aware of different cultures that are followed in Australia and how
forceful implementation of policy had changed the life of indigenous people. The policy and
event had social and historical influence on Australia as well as on me.
It can be concluded from this essay that there are various impacts of policies and events
on life of people and it is essential to first assess the impact of imposing policies on people,
economy and culture of country. The assimilation policy had balanced impact of life of
indigenous people as policy was imposed to development people in context of education, health
and economy but the negative side of this policy was that it didn't focus on cultural development
of aborigines. Ultimately, the result of policy was that it negatively impacted life of people and
to mitigate the lose Kevin had to apologize for the same and make different policies to provide
basic human rights to people and diminish discrimination and racialism from country.

REFERENCES
Books and Journals
Davidson, C., 2021. New insights into the stolen generations. Guardian (Sydney), (1965). p.3.
Ellinghaus, K., 2018. The Moment of Release: The Ideology of Protection and the Twentieth-
Century Assimilation Policies of Exemption and Competency in New South Wales and
Oklahoma. Pacific Historical Review. 87(1). pp.128-149.
Ellinghaus, K., 2022. Blood will tell: Native Americans and assimilation policy. U of Nebraska
Press.
Nelson, J. K. and et.al., 2018. Witnessing anti-white ‘racism’: White victimhood and ‘reverse
racism’in Australia. Journal of Intercultural Studies. 39(3). pp.339-358.
Phillips, M. G. and Osmond, G., 2018. Marching for assimilation: Indigenous identity, sport, and
politics. Australian Journal of Politics & History. 64(4). pp.544-560.
Sharples, R. and Blair, K., 2021. Claiming ‘anti-white racism’in Australia: victimhood, identity,
and privilege. Journal of Sociology. 57(3). pp.559-576.
Shivadas, P., 2019. The practice of public apology: Australia says sorry to the Stolen
Generations. In The Culture of Dissenting Memory (pp. 132-147). Routledge India.
Wolny, R. W., 2018. MULTICULTURAL AUSTRALIA. NARRATIVES OF CONFLICT,
NARRATIVES OF RECONCILIATION: FROM POLITICIANS’SPEECHES TO
STOLEN GENERATIONS NARRATIVES. BAS British and American Studies. 24(24).
pp.77-85.