首页> 外文学位 >Difference and Recognition: Subverting the Australian Colonial Paradigm
【24h】

Difference and Recognition: Subverting the Australian Colonial Paradigm

机译:差异与认可:颠覆澳大利亚殖民主义范式

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

The 1938-1940 Report of the Aborigines Protection Board, and the hearings and minutes of evidence that led up to it, discussed a dual track policy for the state approach to Aboriginal people. First, to "preserve" "full blood" Aboriginal people by relocating and isolating the residents of a number of reserves onto a single "giant reserve," under the supervision of one white man. Second, was "assimilation of the [non-reserve] aborigines into the general community." The giant reserve was never created, but there were mergers between reserves which entailed the forcible relocation of entire Aboriginal communities from one location to another. Commenting on these relocations in 2005, co-founder of Walgett Aboriginal Medical Service and one-time resident of Angledool Reserve, George Rose, wrote: The moving of Angledool -- it was deeper than what people thought. It was the first step to destroying our Aboriginal culture...even I could see that, as a 13 year old. I could see that by combining the three tribes they were destroying the cultures. So, thirteen-year-old George Rose recognized that the mergers were an existential threat to Aboriginal cultures: that "preservation" brought destruction. And the Aborigines Protection Board recognized that there was something to preserve in Aboriginal culture, but failed to understand what and how. What did George Rose recognize? What is a culture? What was wrong with the colonial "preservation" policy and why did it destroy that which it nominally sought to protect? What, in short, sustains colonialism? There is a significant body of excellent anthropological, sociological, and historical scholarship on this topic, but less in the way of philosophical discourse. From a philosophical perspective, we can begin to identify and unpack what is at the core of these questions. From a philosophical perspective, they become questions of the what it means to be human in relation to other humans, and to be humans-in-relation in a colonial context. We can ask what it means to be differently, and what the possibilities of relation with others are. George Rose was a Yawaalaraay man, born on a reserve. He and his mother, Linda Fernando, were both forcibly removed from their families during their youth and sent to boarding houses. They, among many others, were subjected to a colonial attempt at erasing their identity, their difference from the colonial concept of being a modern human. George Rose's life of activism can be read as a response to this colonial imposition, an attempt to make others recognize what he recognized at thirteen. Using a philosophical lens, we can ask the question at the heart of this thesis: what is the relation between recognition and colonialism?
机译:1938年至1940年的原住民保护委员会报告以及导致该问题的听证会和会议纪要,讨论了针对土著人民的国家方针的双重政策。首先,在一个白人的监督下,通过将许多保护区的居民迁移并隔离到一个“巨型保护区”中,以“保留”原住民。第二,是“将[非保留地]土著居民同化为普通社区”。巨型保护区从未建立过,但是保护区之间存在合并,这迫使整个原住民社区从一个地点强制迁移到另一个地点。 Walgett原住民医疗服务公司的共同创始人和Angledool Reserve的一次性居民George Rose在2005年对这些搬迁发表评论时写道:Angledool的搬迁-比人们想像的要深。这是摧毁我们原住民文化的第一步……即使我看到,也只有13岁。我可以看到,通过结合三个部落,他们正在摧毁文化。因此,十三岁的乔治·罗斯(George Rose)意识到合并对土著文化构成了生存威胁:“保存”带来了破坏。土著保护委员会认识到土著文化中有一些需要保留的东西,但是却不了解其内容和方式。乔治·罗斯认识了什么?什么是文化?殖民地“保存”政策出了什么问题?为什么它破坏了名义上要保护的政策?简而言之,什么能维持殖民主义?关于这一主题,有大量的优秀的人类学,社会学和历史学学术著作,但在哲学话语方面却很少。从哲学的角度来看,我们可以开始识别和解开这些问题的核心。从哲学的角度来看,它们成为质疑人类与其他人类的关系以及在殖民地背景下成为亲属关系的人的含义的问题。我们可以问一下与众不同意味着什么,与他人建立关系的可能性是什么。乔治·罗斯(George Rose)是Yawaalaraay的男人,出生于保护区。他和他的母亲琳达·费尔南多(Linda Fernando)在青年时期都被强行带离了家庭,并被送往寄宿房。他们以及其他许多人遭受了殖民主义的企图,以消除他们的身份,这与他们作为现代人的殖民观念有所不同。乔治·罗斯(George Rose)的行动主义一生可以理解为对这种殖民主义气质的回应,试图使其他人认识他在十三岁时所认识到的东西。使用哲学的视角,我们可以提出本文的核心问题:承认与殖民主义之间的关系是什么?

著录项

  • 作者

    Tarr, Amrita.;

  • 作者单位

    Western Sydney University (Australia).;

  • 授予单位 Western Sydney University (Australia).;
  • 学科 Cultural anthropology.
  • 学位 M.Res.
  • 年度 2017
  • 页码 63 p.
  • 总页数 63
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号