Holly Eva Katherine Randell-Moon
Search for other papers by Holly Eva Katherine Randell-Moon in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
Racial capitalism and settler colonization in Australia
Australian debts to Gurindji economies

In the photograph at the opening of the chapter, Vincent Lingiari, from the Gurindji Nation, accepts a symbolic gesture of land return from former Australian Prime Minister Gough Whitlam. Lingiari was a spokesperson for the Gurindji strike, which involved Gurindji, Mudburra and Warlpiri workers and their families protesting conditions on a Northern Territory cattle station. In addition, the workers also argued that they were entitled to the land that the station operated from. Lasting ten years, the strike was part of a wave of Indigenous workers’ and land rights protest culminating in the Aboriginal Land Rights Act 1976. The image is complex. It reveals the contradictions of a white man giving land back to a Nation who never ceded their sovereignty. It also signals the unpaid debts owed to the negation of Indigenous sovereignties that facilitated the wealth of the pastoral industry and Australian national economy. The photograph was carefully staged by Mervyn Bishop, one of the first Indigenous photographers employed in non-Indigenous print media, and is iconic for Indigenous self-representation.

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander readers are advised that the following chapter contains images and names of people who have died.

A gesture foregrounds two figures who stand against a cobalt blue sky and rust coloured landscape. They are both focused intently on the product of that gesture: sand being poured from one hand to another. The figures are Gurindji leader Vincent Lingiari and Australian Prime Minister E. Gough Whitlam. The photograph was taken by Murri photographer Mervyn Bishop, one of the first Aboriginal photographers to work for a news organization in Australia. It records Lingiari accepting a symbolic gesture of the return of First Nations land after many years of resilience and resistance to the pastoral industry's encroachment onto their land. It is an iconic image of First Nations self-determination. Bishop's aesthetic choices for the photograph are central to public understandings of this self-determination.

Figure 14.1 Prime Minister Gough Whitlam pours soil into the hands of traditional landowner Vincent Lingiari, Northern Territory.

Lingiari was a spokesperson and one of the many leaders of the Gurindji Walk-Off, which involved Gurindji, Mudburra and Warlpiri workers and their families protesting conditions on a Northern Territory cattle station. Lasting for ten years, their Walk-Off significantly included the demand for land. The implementation of the Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act 1976 and the eventuation of land title claims and holdings by First Nations of almost 50% of the Northern Territory are attributed to the Walk-Off. As Lingiari later explained, ‘This my place. It musta been one time. It was my place before you [Lord Vestey, cattle station owner] come over on top of me’ (Lingiari 2016: 181).

The image tells a story of the financial traces of racial capitalism and its deposits in Australian nation building. Racial capitalism refers to the role of race and racism in generating profit (see Bhattacharyya 2018), and an extended reflection on how we might ‘map’ racial capitalism is the focus of Bhattacharyya (Chapter 22). This chapter explains how racial ideas influenced the settler colonial treatment of First Nations peoples and devalued their contributions to the land and their work on it. By devaluing the First Nations economies and land management that existed prior to British settlement, colonial authorities and the later Australian government were able to profit from First Nations’ unacknowledged labour. When First Nations peoples did participate in settler colonial and state economic activity such as the pastoral industry, they were racially discriminated against and received lower or no wages. Organized resistance to this racial discrimination and theft of land, exemplified in the Gurindji Walk-Off, represents a challenge to some of the fundamental ideas of wealth generation in Australia.

Race, pastoralism and dispossession

When British settlers invaded Australia at the end of the eighteenth century, they were able to profit from First Nations lands which had been sustainably managed for thousands of years. In his book Dark Emu (Pascoe, Bunurong, Tasmanian and Yuin 2014), historian Bruce Pascoe outlines how First Nations peoples used complex agricultural and aquacultural techniques to extract food from the land while reducing the effort to do so. He quotes a settler account of an automatic fishing machine made of reeds and a special kind of wood (Pascoe 2014: 6–7) and landscape engineering designed to automatically sort fish into a series of pools for harvesting (Pascoe 2014: 72–73). These practices were carefully managed so that natural resources were not depleted. British settlers ignored First Nations’ land management and their sustainable economies. Settlers simply saw an uncultivated land prime for large-scale farming and resource extraction. Racial ideas and their story of human hierarchies influenced the economies of settler colonialism in Australia. Settler colonization is premised on land possession as a long-term practice (Wolfe 2006: 402). That is, settlers colonize territory for the purpose of remaining there. Settler colonization, as with colonization, is justified by the idea that land which is ‘uncultivated’ and not used for economic profit can be appropriated.

In the lands now known as ‘Australia’, the principle of terra nullius, Latin for land belonging to ‘no one’, was used by British settlers to claim possession of Indigenous lands. As Eualeyai/Kamillaroi scholar Larissa Behrendt points out:

Aboriginal people in Australia claim to have the world's oldest living culture. There is evidence that Aboriginal people lived in Australia up to 100,000 years ago … In this context, it is extraordinary that the doctrine of terra nullius would be used to assert Britain's claims to ‘discovery’ and to attempt to legitimize the assertion of British sovereignty over Australia.

(Behrendt 2010: 171)

The use of ‘First Nations’ in this chapter reaffirms that Indigenous peoples were sovereign Nations and peoples, despite British claims. 1 Emergent theories of race helped to justify the extraordinary possession of First Nations Country. Those responsible for colonization held that the ‘stronger’ races would inevitably extirpate ‘weaker’ ones, a view articulated by Charles Darwin after his visit to Van Diemen's Land in 1836 (Curthoys 2008: 233). Economic reasons for the settler colonization of Australia were mutually supportive of the racial science that constructed First Nations peoples as a ‘dying race’ who would ultimately vacate the land for British industry. Britain had an increasingly poor and criminalized urban population as a result of the economic inequalities of the Industrial Revolution. In order to generate profit, this population was exploited as cheap labour and then criminalized for vagrancy under the Poor Laws if they could not afford accommodation. As a result, Australia was settled through mass convict transportation as one means of relieving Britain of this population.

While First Nations peoples were ostensibly offered some rights as British subjects, British settlers constructed themselves as superior, based on their ability to transform natural resources into property and commodity items. First Nations presence on Country was therefore viewed as an impediment to the industries practised by settlers, and these racial ideas justified extensive violence. When the settlement from Sydney, in the Eora Nation's homelands, extended west into Wiradyuri Country (known as the Bathurst plains by settlers), martial law was declared, resulting in a number of killings and massacres (Banivanua Mar and Edmonds 2013: 345). My convict ancestors settled in this area and benefited from the cheap land. Landownership would never have been possible in their homeland, given that their poverty had resulted in a criminal status.

Expanding the settlement inland helped to ‘develop a high-productivity export trade in primary goods’ and ‘Australia's relatively high incomes’ during the middle to later parts of the nineteenth century ‘were derived from resources that could be exploited cheaply and were abundant in relation to the supply of labour’ (Frost 2013: 341).

Seeking greater profits, the pastoral industry expanded into the interior of the continent. Located in the middle of Australia, the Northern Territory's ‘open’ and less settled spaces were considered ideal for cattle husbandry in the middle of the nineteenth century. These assumptions were premised on the erasure of Indigenous presence, custodianship and sovereignty. In Yijarni: True Stories from Gurindji Country, Gurindji historians detail a number of massacres and violent punishments for being on Country and killing cattle. A map is provided which locates massacres across Gurindji and neighbouring Warlpiri Country (Brenda Thornley, First Nations knowledge 2014, as quoted in Charola and Meakins 2016a: 28–29). Often police were complicit in this violence. Gordon Buchanan, a pastoralist in the late nineteenth century, bluntly stated the economies of this violence: ‘Imprisonment for cattle-killing was quite impracticable; and if no punishment were inflicted it would have been impossible to settle the country’ (as cited in Charola and Meakins 2016b: 72).

The extent of settler violence indicates the significant resistance waged by First Nations in the area. Violence began to subside when more Aboriginal settlements were established at the stations at the end of the nineteenth century. As outlined in Yijarni, First Nations peoples lived in camps near the stations in poor-quality accommodation and were provided with basic food rations and clothing. Children were expected to work (Meakins 2016: 183) and were routinely subjected to kidnapping for this purpose and to force their guardians onto stations to work (Wadrill, Gurindji 2016: 127; Meakins and Charola 2016a: 98). Aboriginal peoples built much of the infrastructure for the stations which involved hard manual labour (Wavehill, Gurindji 2016, 97). This included roads, water bores (which were pumped by hand) (Lingiari, Gurindji 2016, 177) and the construction of the Wave Hill airstrip in 1929 (Danbayarri, Gurindji 2016).

Because the Crown claimed all First Nations country through settlement, they provided leases to pastoralists for a small fee in order to foster economic activity. Lord Vestey owned Wave Hill as well as Limbunya Stations, beginning in 1913 and until the 1990s. Gurindji peoples call this ‘Vestey time’ (Gurindji knowledge, as cited in Meakins and Charola 2016b: 3, 235). According to Michael Woods, ‘the Vesteys were the largest landowners in the Northern Territory’ (Woods 2013: 125) and operated a global company that benefited from British imperial and colonial trading networks (Woods 2013: 124–125), with businesses extending to Latin America and Africa (125).

Protection, welfare and Walk-Offs

Protection policies were introduced in the early twentieth century. Under these policies, First Nations peoples were rendered wards of the state and subject to state control concerning where they lived, worked and who they married (see Foster 2000). Pastoralist responsibilities then shifted from treating First Nations peoples as criminal (because they were ‘trespassing’ on pastoralist land) to welfare populations (where they were dependent on pastoralists for food and shelter). Pastoralists benefited from Protection policies which enabled the exemption of wages for First Nations peoples in exchange for welfare provision (Anthony 2007: 46). At the time of the Wave Hill Walk-Off in 1966, Charlie Ward reports that white workers were paid approximately $33 a week, compared to $6 for Aboriginal workers (Ward 2016: 23). Mick Rangiari explained: ‘We are good people and the Vesteys did not treat us the same as everybody else … They been get rich by the Gurindji people and nothing was given back to us’ (Rangiari, Gurindji 1998: 5). Despite these harsh conditions, Thalia Anthony suggests that there were possibilities for ‘transgression’ because First Nations workers and their extended families and communities generally lived on their Country. As such, they were able to continue practising (albeit in limited ways) their languages, laws and ceremonies (Anthony 2007: 47; see also Jimmy and Biddy Wavehill, Gurindji 2014, as quoted in Charola and Meakins 2016a, 114).

Towards the middle of the twentieth century, there were a number of industrial strikes and Walk-Offs by First Nations workers, including the 1946 Pilbara Pastoral Workers’ Strike in Western Australia (see Hess 1994). In 1966 the Commonwealth Conciliation and Arbitration Commission overturned a clause in the Cattle Industry (Northern Territory) Award which denied equal wages to Aboriginal workers. Due to industry fears that equal wages would cut into industry profits, the award was given a three-year transition (Ward 2016: 23). This prompted First Nations action. Under the direction of a Gurindji Elder, Sandy Moray Junganaiari, and with external assistance from Dexter Daniels, from Roper River and the North Australian Workers Union, workers at the Wave Hill Station vacated on the morning of 23 August 1966. As Minoru Hokari (2000) notes, calling the Walk-Off a ‘strike’, as it is sometimes known, interprets the resistance through an assumed white lens of economic bargaining. While wages were one concern, as outlined by Lingiari (Gurindji 2016) and Mick Rangiari (Gurindji 1997, 1998) among other leaders, land was their central demand. The Gurindji workers explained, ‘One way walk-off, that's it!’ (First Nations knowledge, as cited in Hokari 2000: 107). In 1967 they settled at Wattie Creek, known as Daguragu, which the Gurindji leaders explained is ‘the main place of our dreaming [sic]’ (Hokari 2000:110).

Freehold title and the handover

Publicizing their cause to unions, student associations and the media in the south and east coasts of Australia, the Gurindji community were able to convince the Federal Government under Gough Whitlam to release land from the Vesteys’ lease. Aboriginal Freehold Title was made possible under the Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act 1976, initiated by the Whitlam government. This allowed First Nations peoples to own their land. The freehold deeds for the land at Daguragu were not awarded to the Gurindji community until 1986, owing to ongoing legal and bureaucratic processes (Ward 2016: 308). The community formed the Murramulla Gurindji Company, meaning ‘traditional owner’, in 1970, to operate their cattle business (Ward 2016: 63). The Gurindji Aboriginal Corporation was formed in 2014 as a result of Native Title over the township of Kalkaringi (which incorporated Daguragu). The handover photograph features prominently on their website (Gurindji Aboriginal Corporation 2018). I gave notice to this Corporation regarding the writing of this chapter. Native Title recognizes that First Nations peoples have rights to land derived from their traditional law and customs. This is significant, because Native Title recognizes that the Crown's right to possess land (stemming from terra nullius) does not override First Nations’ law.

The famous handover occurred on 16 August 1975 at Wattie Creek. Charlie Ward reports that it was an improvised performance by the government entourage based on reversing an earlier attempted treaty between Wurundjeri Elders in Port Phillip in the nineteenth century (Ward 2016: 183). Ward notes that there is a medieval European equivalent called ‘livery in deed’ (Ward 2016: 185). This ritual is actually connected to the settlement of Australia through the livery of seisin, which encompasses the livery in deed where two parties meet on land to exchange soil to ratify transfer of ownership (Miller, Eastern Shawnee Tribe 2010: 22). Captain James Cook engaged in these and other practices by planting a flag in Sydney cove in 1770 to claim British possession in absentia of First Nations peoples through terra nullius (see Behrendt, Eualeyai/Kamillaroi 2010: 174).

Photography ‘has played a part in the history of attempted genocide’ of First Nations peoples by documenting their erasure (Dewdney 1994: 17). This is because the camera is often viewed as a ‘truthful recording of nature’ (Dewdney 1994:19), as if what is being photographed is simply being represented as it is. Andrew Dewdney explains how this ignores the staging and posing of subjects as well as lighting and framing used to record and represent the image in a certain way. There are also the cultural meanings through which we interpret images. Photographs of First Nations people in the nineteenth century circulated as part of a global visual economy where images of ‘disappearing races’ had value because they could be marketed as the only record of a community's existence. Although these images were supposed to reflect the exotic difference of First Nations peoples, they were often highly staged according to similar sets of ideas about so-called ‘less civilized’ peoples. Art historian Nicholas Mirzoeff describes how the anthropologist Herbert Lang travelled to Africa on behalf of the American Museum of Natural History to photograph ‘traditional’ people in Mangbetu. Based on the writings of other Europeans who had travelled to Africa, he expected to see a great hall for tribal meetings in one of the towns. When he did not find one, the residents built one, which he photographed as proof of ‘native’ culture (Mirzoeff 2000: 146).

Because the meaning of a photograph is constructed through the cultural and historical context in which it is viewed, colonial photography in Australia has in turn been appropriated by contemporary First Nations communities to instead evidence ‘the impact of colonisation upon their culture’ (Dewdney 1994, 27). In this way, photography can be used by First Nations peoples to reverse the colonial gaze. In considering the photographic image in Australian history in relation to First Nations peoples, it is significant that the handover was photographed by Mervyn Bishop, from Brewarrina in Muruwari, Ngemba, Weilwan and Yualwarri Country, New South Wales. His life story also demonstrates how racial policies influence First Nations mobility and the development of another industry, news photography.

Protection policies, which dictated where Indigenous children could receive education, influenced Bishop's early schooling and he was fortunate to receive a ‘bursary to attend Dubbo High School’ (Bishop, Murri 1994: 80; Bishop, Murri and Randell 2019). Bishop has recounted that there ‘weren't many Aboriginal kids’ during his school years (Bishop, Murri 1994: 84). This was still true several decades later when I attended the same school. Bishop's academic achievements led him to Sydney, where he worked as a cadet photographer for the Sydney Morning Herald. This career path was conspicuous, as he was the only Aboriginal photographer working for a metropolitan news organization at the time. Despite winning the prestigious News Photographer of the Year award in 1971 for ‘A Life and Death Dash’, he was not promoted. He later concluded: ‘I'd hit a barrier in what I had to remind myself was still a white world’ (Bishop, Murri 1994: 84). He then worked for the Federal Government's Department of Aboriginal Affairs (Bishop, Murri 1994: 84), which is how he came to photograph the handover. One of Bishop's aims was to establish a photography unit in the Department, which would also ‘train other Aboriginal people and establish an Aboriginal picture library’ (Bishop, Murri 1994: 85). This would have been significant in enabling First Nations control over how Aboriginal Affairs were represented and understood by the public, in addition to securing further First Nations contribution to news photography. Although I received permission from Bishop to use and write about the handover image, the copyright lies with the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet.

As explained in an interview with my nephew Finn Randell, Bishop's position in the Department of Aboriginal Affairs gave him priority in photographing Lingiari and Whitlam before the other media. He had the subjects restage the handover, with Lingiari positioned at the front (Bishop, Murri and Randell 2019). Whitlam is significantly taller than Lingiari. This is muted by Bishop's framing and positioning of the latter, which works to subtly undermine the ordering of the subjects’ names in the official government title for the photograph. Based on the subject arrangement in Bishop's work, a different visual caption is offered: ‘Vincent Lingiari receives Gurindji soil from Gough Whitlam’. Or perhaps, given its centrality to the image: ‘Gurindji land relates Gough Whitlam to Vincent Lingiari’.

The presumptive right of Crown possession saturates the racial economies of colonial trade and the later development of capitalism under Australian governments. In the chapters by Comyn (Chapter 4) on Aotearoa New Zealand and Cordes (Chapter 5) on the US, the connection between debt and racialized subordination in laying the groundwork for settler colonialism is clearly articulated. The economic development of Australia likewise is indebted to the First Nations labour that carefully sustained and supported arable farming land for British settlers at great profit. When First Nations peoples did contribute directly to economies such as the pastoral industry, their labour had no wage value. The extraordinary Gurindji and Murri peoples who feature in this story form part of a larger narrative of First Nations mobility and Australian economic activity. The Gurindji Walk-Off is a story about Country where economies of responsibility to land and peoples continue, despite the obstacles of Vestey and settler times, which are a brief (but violent) insertion into ongoing First Nations histories of Country.

Gurindji ≈ Country ≈ life

Acknowledgement

I would like to acknowledge the sovereignty of Wiradyuri peoples on whose lands this chapter was written and pay respects to Elders past, present, always.

Further resources

Bishop, M. Murri (1994) ‘Looking back on thirty years’. In A. Dewdney (ed.), Racism, Representation and Photography. Sydney: Inner City Education Centre, pp. 79–88.

Bishop, M. Murri and Randell, F. Non-Indigenous (2019) ‘Pieces of wisdom’. https://player.whooshkaa.com/pieces-of-wisdom?episode=403318 (accessed 31 August 2022).

Gurindji Aboriginal Corporation (2018) www.gurindjicorp.com.au/ (accessed 31 August 2022).

Works cited

Anthony, T. (2007) ‘Criminal justice and transgression on northern Australian cattle stations’. In I. Macfarlane and M. Hannah (eds), Transgressions: Critical Australian Indigenous Histories, 35–61. Acton: ANU Press, pp. 35–61. https://press-files.anu.edu.au/downloads/press/p21521/pdf/book.pdf (accessed 31 August 2022).

Banivanua Mar, T. and Edmonds, P. (2013) ‘Indigenous and settler relations’. In A. Bashford and S. Macintyre (eds), The Cambridge History of Australia: Volume 1, Indigenous and Colonial Australia. Port Melbourne: Cambridge University Press, pp. 342–366.

Behrendt, L. Eualeyai/Kamillaroi (2010) ‘The doctrine of discovery in Australia’. In R. J. Miller, J. Ruru, L. Behrendt and T. Lindbert (eds), Discovering Indigenous Lands: The Doctrine of Discovery in the English Colonies. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 171–186.

Bhattacharyya, G. (2018) Rethinking Racial Capitalism: Questions of Reproduction and Survival. London: Rowman & Littlefield.

Bishop, M. (1971) ‘Life and death dash’ (black and white photograph).

Bishop, M. Murri (1994) ‘Looking back on thirty years’. In A. Dewdney (ed.), Racism, Representation and Photography. Sydney: Inner City Education Centre, pp. 79–88.

Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet ( Bishop, M. / 1975). ‘Prime Minister Gough Whitlam pours soil into the hands of traditional land owner Vincent Lingiari, Northern Territory’ (colour photograph).

Bishop, M., Murri and Randell, F. Non-Indigenous (2019) ‘Pieces of wisdom’. https://player.whooshkaa.com/pieces-of-wisdom?episode=403318 (accessed 31 August 2022).

Charola, E. and Meakins, F. Non-Indigenous (eds) (2016a) Yijarni: True Stories from Gurindji Country. Canberra: Aboriginal Studies Press.

Charola, E. and Meakins, F. Non-Indigenous (2016b) ‘Other reported accounts of conflict’. In E. Charola and F. Meakins (eds), Yijarni: True Stories from Gurindji Country. Canberra: Aboriginal Studies Press, pp. 67–72.

Curthoys, A. (2008) ‘Genocide in Tasmania: The history of an idea’. In A. D. Moses (ed.), Empire, Colony, Genocide: Conquest, Occupation and Subaltern Resistance in World History. Oxford: Berghahn Books, pp. 229–252.

Danbayarri, D. Gurindji . (2016) ‘The first aeroplanes at Wave Hill Station: 1929’. In E. Charola and F. Meakins (eds), Yijarni: True Stories from Gurindji Country. Canberra: Aboriginal Studies Press, pp. 137–143.

Dewdney, A. (1994) ‘Racism, representation and photography’. In A. Dewdney (ed.), Racism, Representation and Photography. Sydney: Inner City Education Centre, pp. 15–39.

Foster, R. (2000) ‘“Endless trouble and agitation”: Aboriginal activism in the protectionist era’. Journal of the Historical Society of South Australia 28: 15–27.

Frost, L. (2013) ‘The economy’. In A. Bashford and S. Macintyre (eds), The Cambridge History of Australia: Volume 1, Indigenous and Colonial Australia. Port Melbourne: Cambridge University Press, pp. 315–341.

Gurindji Aboriginal Corporation (2018) www.gurindjicorp.com.au/ (accessed 31 August 2022).

Hess, M. (1994) ‘Black and red: The Pilbara Pastoral Workers’ strike, 1946’. Aboriginal History 18(1): 65–83.

Hokari, M. Non-Indigenous (2000) ‘From Wattie Creek to Wattie Creek: An oral historical approach to the Gurindji walk-off’. Aboriginal History 24: 98–116.

Lingiari, V. Gurindji (2016) ‘Events leading up to the walk-off’. In E. Charola and F. Meakins (eds), Yijarni: True Stories from Gurindji Country. Canberra: Aboriginal Studies Press, pp. 176–182.

Meakins, F. Non-Indigenous (2016) ‘Conditions under the Vesteys’. In E. Charola and F. Meakins (eds), Yijarni: True Stories from Gurindji Country. Canberra: Aboriginal Studies Press, pp. 182–186.

Meakins, F. and Charola, E. Non-Indigenous (2016a) ‘European accounts of Gurindji moving to cattle stations’. In E. Charola and F. Meakins (eds), Yijarni: True Stories from Gurindji Country. Canberra: Aboriginal Studies Press, pp. 98–100.

Meakins, F. and Charola, E. Non-Indigenous (2016b) ‘Introduction’. In E. Charola and F. Meakins (eds), Yijarni: True Stories from Gurindji Country. Canberra: Aboriginal Studies Press, pp. 1–4.

Miller, R. J. Eastern Shawnee Tribe (2010) ‘The Doctrine of Discovery’. In R. J. Miller, J. Ruru, L. Behrendt and T. Lindbert (eds), Discovering Indigenous Lands: The Doctrine of Discovery in the English Colonies. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 1–25.

Mirzoeff, N. (2000) An Introduction to Visual Culture. London: Routledge.

Pascoe, B. Yuin, Bunurong, and Tasmanian (2014) Dark Emu: Black Seeds, Agriculture or Accident? Sydney: Magabala Books.

Rangiari, M. Gurindji (1997) ‘Talking history’. In G. Yunupingu (ed.), Our Land is Our Life: Land Rights – Past, Present and Future. St Lucia: University of Queensland Press, pp. 33–38.

Rangiari, M. Gurindji (1998) ‘They been get rich by the Gurindji people’. In A. Wright for the Central Land Council (ed.), Take Power Like This Old Man Here: An Anthology of Writings Celebrating Twenty Years of Land Rights in Central Australia, 1977–1997. Alice Springs: IAD Press, pp. 4–5.

Wadrill, V. Gurindji . (2016) ‘They Took the Kids Away’. In E. Charola and F. Meakins (eds), Yijarni: True Stories from Gurindji Country. Canberra: Aboriginal Studies Press, pp. 127–128.

Ward, C. (2016) A Handful of Sand: The Gurindji Struggle, After the Walk-Off. Clayton: Monash University Press.

Wavehill, R. Gurindji (2016) ‘How Gurindji Were Brought to Work on Wave Hill Station’. In E. Charola and F. Meakins (eds), Yijarni: True Stories from Gurindji Country. Canberra: Aboriginal Studies Press, pp. 84–97.

Wolfe, P. (2006) ‘Settler colonialism and the elimination of the native’. Journal of Genocide Research 8(4): 387–409.

Woods, M. (2013) ‘The elite countryside: Shifting rural geographies of the transnational super-rich’. In I. Hay (ed.), Geographies of the Super-Rich. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, pp. 123–136.

Note

1 The chapters in this book concerned with various geographical locations make different decisions about the terminology used to describe pre-settler societies in settler colonies. While Indigenous is appropriate in some contexts, it can appear offensive, due to historic usage whereby First Nations or First Peoples were referred to in a dehumanizing manner, as part of the ‘indigenous flora and fauna’. The choice of terminology throughout this chapter – as elsewhere in the book – thus reflects an attempt to use the most respectful language for each of the varied contexts under consideration.
  • Collapse
  • Expand

All of MUP's digital content including Open Access books and journals is now available on manchesterhive.

 

The entangled legacies of empire

Race, finance and inequality

Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 685 685 132
PDF Downloads 589 589 97