Blog 10: Rabbit-Proof Fence

Human rights have always been a problem in our world today and in history, taking place in different parts around the world, holding different situations, as well as taking place at different times... However, whoever was being affected never gave up to stand up for them, which makes our world so much stronger today!

In "Rabbit-Proof Fence", Aboriginal populations face injustices as the European settlers begin to colonize the western coast of Australia. The entire Aboriginal population realized that the arrival of the European settlers meant "the destruction of their traditional society and the dispossession of their lands" (Pilkington 13). The Europeans were pushing the Aboriginals away from their lands, not noticing that they were taking everything away from them, especially going against their individual rights...

While the Aboriginal population was being held in one area by the Europeans, the Nyungar people were cut off from their natural food source, hoping that maybe some of the white people would give them a portion of their food. However, Molly's uncle, Moody, explained and reminded the Nyungar peoplethat "when an old man Udja complained to the magistrate that a white man stole his wife, Nella, he was given a bag of flour and told to go home... That old man expected the same form of justice under the white man's law. He never got it" (Pilkington 15). This incident shows that the "Right to Equality Before the Law" and the "Freedom from Discrimination" was being violated. The Aboriginal population was being treated more strictly than the European settlers, even if it was their land. They had their food taken away, and when they wanted to get something back from  the white people, they couldn't; the Europeans thought that they were much more superior than the Aboriginals and could control them. This was probably happening because of the differences in race, but it shouldn't have if they were following the laws...


Another incident happened when Bidgup and Meedo wanted to go down their hunting trails, in search of fresh food. They weren't allowed to go any farther than what they saw in front of them because the trails are all blocked by fences. Meedo explained that "when [they] climbed over the fence, one of those men pointed one of those things- guns- at [them] and threatened to shoot [them] if [they] went in there again" (Pilkington 14). The Aboriginal population, nevertheless the Nyungar people, weren't allowed to walk on their land, wherever they please. They were told to stay in one area, the area within the fences. Even though the two tribe members wanted to go hunting, they couldn't. This was clearly a violation of the "Right to Own Property" and the "Right to Free Movement...". The native tribe members weren't allowed to walk on their own soil, which was taken by the Europeans. It was a separation of land between the Aboriginals and the Europeans. Not only did they take all of the fertile land for themselves, but they left the Aboriginals with nothing, only that of what they gave them, which wasn't much. According the the law, this was not allowed, but the law was still broken...

Finally, the Aboriginal culture was always being threatened. The native tribe remembers "the corroborrees and songs that they were forbidden to dance and sing" unless they were forced to do so by the government officials (Pilkington 16)."...The corroborrees [they] shared and danced by scores of feet" would be left in the dust surrounded by the moonlight of the open fire, "warriors with painted bodies and plumes of feathers on their... heads" would be lost, forgotten, and left in the past, and "important dates on their seasonal calendars" would be gone. Every little part of their culture was being taken away from them and always being limited to their growth, as well as what it could become. Their traditions and beliefs were always at the risk of disappearance. No matter how hard the Aboriginals tried to keep the characteristics of their culture and who they are intact, it was always being forced to change by the Europeans. They were always being torn apart from their population and culture, and this only showed the violation of the "Right to Participate in the Cultural Life of the Community", the "Freedom of Belief and Religion", and the "Right to a Nationality...". Maintaining their culture was always a struggle for them, all because the Europeans were always interfering with it...

This, what had happened with Australia and its Aboriginals, mirrors many events and situations that have happened in the United States. In Australia, the European settlers thought that everything that they did was necessary and appropriate for the country's growth, thinking that they were "civilizing" it. However, they were doing quite the opposite; they were ruining the country, stopping it from evolving into something more, something that it could be in the future.

The Manifest Destiny was the 19th century belief that the United States was destined to expand across the North American continent, from the Atlantic Seaboard to the Pacific Ocean. They thought they could change the country, more like the world. This same exact belief stretches back even farther into history, way back when Christopher Columbus "sailed the ocean blue", Spanish monarchs were taking over, and pilgrims were still trying to find their way... The Native Americans, much like the Aboriginals, were having everything taken away from them, their food, their culture, but most importantly, their land. They were treated like dirt, like they were nothing and didn't matter. However, they never gave up on their beliefs and their strength to keep moving forward, no matter how many rights they were being taken away. Those rights were exactly the same ones as the Aboriginals and many more; they weren't treated fairly compared to others, they were being moved out of their land, and their culture was always being questioned...
Many events that happen in history mirror those of other events at other time periods, just like in Australia and in the United States.

Every situation has its own purpose, and every situation has some solution. However, not every solution fits the the purpose of the situation... (As confusing as that may sound...)
Let's take, for example, what had happened in Australia. Children were being taken away from their families, from their mothers, but why? Was it justified to do this? Some might defend that the actions of the government were morally justified, especially the relocating of children of mixed descent. However, I personally believe that this was wrong, in every way, shape, and form. Even though children may have been relocated for what was thought as "better", it wasn't at all. Children were being taken away from their mothers and families. At this point, it didn't matter what race or culture they were; all that mattered was the fact that they were being relocated. This wasn't justified at all, even by the government, or at least I think so... What do you think?

Aboriginals in Australia and Native Americans in the United States are two very different but similar cultures and tribes, not only in traditions and beliefs, but most importantly, in what they went through in the past. They faced tough times, physically and emotionally. But, they never gave up! And that's how far the world has come today...
If something is meaningful to a person, that person won't stop, rather keep going until they're satisfied with the outcome!