Europeans Invade Australia and the Stolen Generation
Europeans invaded Australia barring regard to the will of Aborigines, and they declared it unoccupied when they first arrived there. The natives were driven away from their properties and children were taken away from parents. It used to be an episode which turned out to be known as a stolen generation. Therefore, the Aborigines had been scattered and chased away and executed. From the two sources, it is evident that Australia became the colony of Europeans. It is also proved that the Aborigines have been living there before the arrival of colonial masters.
Contradictions about Captain Cook and Genocide
There are contradictions as to whether or not Captain Cook directed the killing of the indigenous Aborigines. The second article alludes that these people the will of the typical occupants and even killed them, while in the first column, it is claimed that there were no directives from the government to wipe out the Aborigines, but instead, there were campaigns to save them. There are also indications that there were acts of genocide commissions, but Captain Cook was never involved in such acts of violence. The second article suggests that should there need be to wipe out monuments, and then even the signs of creeks should be torn down, an argument which is contradicted by the author Grant. There is also an argument by the sultan that the 26th day is an important occasion to remember as a day which started the ongoing genocide of their people. However, this is discredited by the fact Aborigines' number has risen more than it was before. The paper hence suggests that the monuments should be wiped out from the face of Australia.
The Importance of Removing Monuments
It is most convincing, from the two articles that the removal of monuments would be of great potential to the history of Australia. Stan Grant asks a very fundamental question about the monument of Captain James Cook lying at the heart of Sydney. He compares the consequences of the inscription on that statue as at during the time it was built and its today's influence on the lives of the indigenous people, claiming that it was Cook who discovered Australia. Grant clarifies that, even though people as at that time did not question the manner in which James Cook founded their ancestral nation, but today, many of them know that their ancestors had already settled there sixty-five years before the arrival of Captain Cook.
The Ignored Realities of History and the Need for Change
The origin and history of Australia are told in a manner which lacks regard and respect for the Aboriginal society. The monument, according to Stan Grant, portrays that the country was empty, with no occupants, no culture, nor ways of life until the arrival of the white man. However, his ancestors had already settled there before the invasion. The existence of the statue, therefore, acts as a reminder of pain, suffering, and torture against the aboriginal people, even today. Similarly, there is a moral awakening of the people across America. There is reigniting of past grievances by the Fascists, supremacists, and the neo-Nazis across the USA. For instance, there is an uprising in Charlottesville, Virginia, which has led to violence and deaths. Many leaders across the America's political divide have criticized and condemned the acts despite the fact their president has acted partially on several occasions in press briefings.
Importance of Understanding History and Removing Monuments
In the same manner, an attempt to ignore the realities of our history is also a significant challenge to our progress. Historians have realized that the struggle to end the slave trade, human exploitation, and racism is a difficulty and tall order to the USA, and even several attempts by great men like Abraham Lincoln, Martin Luther King, accompanied by other civil rights movements have proved futile to this discourse. It has been so because America's wealth was created by African slaves and even the fact that the country was founded by invading other people's indigenous lands. From the circumstances, it would be unfortunate for Australians to ignore their history and fail to recognize their indignity and heritage as others do. It is why this paper intends that removal of these statues would have fundamental importance, in the beginning, to seek for the new era of the history of Australia.
Removing Monuments to Eliminate Hate and Recognize Indigenous Resistance
In America, the monuments to hate, which remind people of the past injustices committed against communities are being brought down. It is as well necessary for pillars, which are just preserves of superiority complex against the Aborigines should be torn down as well. River Cox, for instance, is a reminder of an extermination war in the 1820s, in which William Cox agitated for the massacre of the indigenous society in their land. However, despite all these crimes, the monuments of such people are still spread across the Australian nation, while less is known about the people who stood firm to fight against the invasion of their land. It is essential to understand the background of human history, for their lies their identities and legacy. It, therefore, ultimately means that it is orderly to tell and face the past as it were, to necessitate healing and thus help in building blocks of progress about the truth as the paper suggests through acts of defacing the country of the monuments.
The Importance of Recognizing Genocide and Scrutinizing the Past
There are various occasions where the article of, "The monument haters can't handle the truth," expresses the same opinions with the other while at the same time appearing contradictory. For instance, the observation of the 26th day in the Australian calendar is clouded with a lack of clarity about its importance. It is not clear whether people celebrate the creation of the new nation, under freedom and human rights, or people remember the day of the arrival of the first fleets. It is from this article that there were people who caused genocide in Australia, even though not all like Captain Cook who was just a navigator. Hence, there is no denying that these peoples' monuments ought to be wiped out. It is also stated that people like Macquarie sought to protect the lives of settlers at all costs and ordered his soldiers to shoot Aborigines who could not surrender. It goes against the human practice respect for life whether termed as murder or genocide.
The reality that there are more Aborigines today more than they were before the arrival of the British does not negate the fact that there were massacres. The drawing of comparisons between the high numbers of Jewish that perished during Hitler's rule and the fewer Aborigines who were killed as well as an indication that it is the outcome of the massacre which matters but not the act itself, this is misleading and unjustifiable. Again it is admitted that aboriginal children are being stolen by racist groups, that deaths of Aborigines were high before colonization. However, there is no acceptance to scrutinize the past and tell its story most properly.
