Skrevet af Marat Yafasov 2.

a
Bagsvrd Kostskole og Gymnasium

Side 1 af 4

THE WHITE MANS BURDEN: AUSTRALIA AND THE STOLEN GENERATION.

TAKE up the White Mans burden - Send forth the best ye breed- Go bind your sons to exile, To
serve your captives need; Those are the words of Rudyard Kipling that are meant to
describe the back then ubiquitous way of thinking that was called The white mans
burden.

It is an ideology that dictates that it is the moral obligation of the white man to better the
lives of the coloured people of the world whether they wanted it or not. It was an
ideology that sprang up from the need of a moral justification for imperialism during the
Victorian age but stayed in the minds of men for long after that age had ended. In many
places in the world the so called civilized nations of the west sought to bring literacy and
economic prosperity to the so called savages around the world. But in no place was this
policy more extreme than in Australia for here the civilized people not only tried to
forcefully remove children from their mothers, sometimes moments after the child had left
the womb. No, for here they also tried to breed out the aboriginal blood through
selectively marrying of half-castes to whites.

During the period of approximately from 1910 to 1970 the abduction of aboriginal children
was a commonality. With the goal of bettering the lives of the aboriginal savages, up to
100.000 aboriginal children were abducted and put in either foster families or special
aboriginal orphanages. But at the start of the 70ies the program was abandoned was it
because of the increased public awareness or because of the utter failure of the program I
cannot say. But fact is that the practice has been abolished. Now 40 years later the debate is
still raging as to the morality of this program. And while the government made a formal
apology back in 2008, is it something that is actually pardonable? Is it possible to forgive
the people behind the abduction of a so called Stole Generation (or two to be exact)? Can
the moral debt left by the ruining of thousands of lives be pardoned by the use of an
eloquent excuse?

Skrevet af Marat Yafasov 2.a
Bagsvrd Kostskole og Gymnasium

Side 2 af 4

As the old saying goes: The end justifies the means. And in this case the end was the
education and the improvement of living standards for the aboriginals through integration
and assimilation. No matter how you look at it, it is a noble goal. With the western lifestyle
comes education and the improvement of living standards, something absent from the
aboriginal way of life. But in this case the end does not justify the means. Australians
sought the complete assimilation of the abducted children. They sought to completely
eradicate any trace of aboriginal culture in these children. This is not the same as when an
adult deciding that a child needs to go to school. When the adult decides that a child needs
to go to school it is because the child needs the tools to live in that type of society that they
live in. Negligence of this is evil because if a child is not taught these skills, it is the same
as letting them die.

But when a white man decides that he must take on the so called the burden of the white
man and bring literacy to the savages, you rob the indigenous population of their
completely valid way of living. In a world where all morals are subjective it is not for any
one person to decide that one way of living is superior to another. This is one of the core
principles of democracy: any man has the right to do whatsoever he pleases, till the
moment he decides to rob another of the same privilege. A man can try to convince
another that his views are superior and should therefore be followed. A man may use the
principles of logic and argumentation to convince another. But a man cannot force his own
ideals through violence on another. The act of coercion is by its very nature evil. In the
same way it was wrong of the Australians to force their ideals on the aboriginals without
their consent. In the very same manner as it is wrong to steal anothers property, it is
wrong to steal a babe from their mothers breast.

Lets go back to the analogy of the parent and the child. When a parent decides the early
direction of a childs life, it is because the child is not capable of doing it themselves. They
cannot care for themselves. Without help and guidance they would starve to death. They
are still a blank canvas. It is a canvas that a parent and teachers of their respective societies
have to paint with ideals, morals and knowledge. The child is an extension of the parent
Skrevet af Marat Yafasov 2.a
Bagsvrd Kostskole og Gymnasium

Side 3 af 4

and most see it as a privilege to raise one. When one robs a parent of their child, they rob
them of the pinnacle of many years of work and dedication. A parent automatically has an
attachment to their child. They view it as their child and no one elses. And as stated
previously: stealing anothers property is evil.

The white mans burden dictates that one should forcibly paint ones own ideals on
another mans canvas. Coercing them into acknowledge your own beliefs as their own.
Threats and violence is the only methods able to achieve this. And as I have stated
previously forcing people to do things without their consent is evil. But the government of
Australia went beyond that. After failing to fully assimilate the aboriginals into their
society, they tried to force their ideals on their children by abducting them. They punished
them for using their own language and prohibited them from access to their own culture.
But this plan of theirs backfired. Instead of assimilating into their society most aboriginal
children were stuck in the middle. Neither being able to fully forget their ancestors
culture but also not fully accepting the culture of their oppressors.

This has resulted in the scarring of two generations: The children who were abducted and
ended up as culturally confused zombies. And the parents who had to experience getting
their child taken away from them. The actions of the Australian government would have
been easier to extenuate had they actually succeeded in their original goals: improving the
quality of life of the aboriginals. Sometimes the end does justify the means. But when ones
means are as horrible as they were, and one misses the end by a landslide it is
unforgivable. Today the aboriginals who have grown up as part of The Stolen Generation
are not leading very good lives. Studies show that there are no tangible improvements
between the lives they led and the ones they lead now. By many standards they are worse
off now. Children who were part of the stolen generation were less likely to complete their
secondary education compared to other aboriginal children. As part of losing their culture
many also started to indulge in illegal activities and do drugs.

Skrevet af Marat Yafasov 2.a
Bagsvrd Kostskole og Gymnasium

Side 4 af 4

And with this we return to the original point. Is the abduction of aboriginal children
excusable? This answer may surprise you. But I honestly believe that it is something that
should be excused. But do not mistake forgiveness for acceptance. Such means as were
used should never be used. The coercion of innocent people is not to be tolerated. We live
in a society of free speech, and property rights. Removing children from their parents
without a tangible reason behind the abduction is intolerable.

But those were practices of several generations ago. When one truly wants to make up for
the cruelties of their ancestors one should not condemn him. But work together with them
to work towards a better future. It is important to let old grudges die and not colour your
views today. The practices that happened during the stolen generation are a thing of the
past. The current Australian government is doing all in its might to remedy the damage
that has been done. And such actions should not be met with misplaced anger but with
cooperation. Perhaps the time has come to put down the burden of the white man?