In his book Conquest. A New History of the Modern World, David Day has a chapter on “Supplanting the Savages.”
In 1804, in order to pre-empt French occupation of Tasmania, Lieutenant-Colonel David Collins was sent, with accompanying soldiers and convicts, to occupy the island. However, for thousands of years the island had already been settled by Aboriginal inhabitants. Indeed, prior to 1804, when ships had made brief stays in Tasmania’s sheltered bays, Europeans had often described the Aborigines as living idyllic lives, much in line with Rousseau’s view of indigenous peoples as ‘noble savages.’
The British government told Collins to do everything in his power to ensure harmonious relationships with “the natives.” But this proved impossible once the function of white settlement in Tasmania changed. For initially this served merely as “a contained coastal outpost designed to ward off rival empires.” However, it gradually became the granary for the Sydney settlement.
In Tasmania arable areas were limited. Land commissioners began to divide up this land, with the government issuing grants for farming. But this was also the very land on which the livelihood of Aborigines depended for game and other foodstuffs. It was therefore inevitable that the Aborigines would resist and attack the British invaders.
Now the earlier descriptions of Aborigines, which had been mostly positive, were increasingly replaced by characterisations that demonised them. They were compared with orangutans. It was said to be a disgrace to the human race to call them Men. As Day observes, supplanting societies in seeking to justify their dispossession of others typically dehumanise indigenous inhabitants. Often this is because such societies “are intent on unleashing a savagery of their own to achieve it.”
The motive for dispossessing others, as in the Tasmanian case, is often greed. But dispossessors like to kid themselves that their motives are more noble than this. So in 1830 before the US Congress President Andrew Jackson argued that the decision to “place a dense and civilised population in large tracts of country now occupied by a few savage hunters” was actually being done for the good of the Indians themselves - to prevent conflict with the whites and giving them the opportunity to become civilised themselves.
As I was reflecting on these and other historical examples of the rationalisation of human evil I could not but help find a parallel between this and the abominable attitudes and behaviour currently finding expression in a church community with which I have dealings. There some members of the host, largely white and small Anglo-Celtic congregation, are treating with contempt members of the non-English speaking background congregation, which is supposed to be part of the church community. Indeed, actions have been taken which even smack of dispossessing these dear Christians - all rationalised, of course!
Posted March 4, 2010
Upon clicking 'Buy now' you will be redirected to paypal.com where you can securely and quickly complete your purchase with a few clicks.
Immediately after payment at PayPal you will be redirected to a download page which
provides you instant access to your purchase.
