More handpicked essays just for you.
What are the implications of a universal declaration of human rights
An essay on universal declaration of human rights
An essay on universal declaration of human rights
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
The Australian and American Civil Rights Movement was the fight for racial equality of the people living in Australia and the United States. The Australian’s were fighting for the rights of the Indigenous people, whereas the United States were fighting for the rights of the African-American’s. The Civil Rights period was at its peak in the 1960’s in both Australia and America. The Australian Civil Rights Movement was heavily influenced by the American Civil Rights Movement as they gained ideas and inspiration from the protests, organisations and campaigns that occurred in America in order to put an end to the inequality that existed in both sides of the World. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) helped motivate and encourage the civil rights movement in both these countries as it set a …show more content…
In 1901, the Indigenous gained their voting rights back after being taken away from them in the 1800s. One of major break throughs was the success of the Aboriginal’s gaining their land rights back due to the ‘Mabo’ case, which was an on-going 10 year protest to achieve recognition that Indigenous people did exist and live in Australia before the European Settlement. As well as this, in 1967 a referendum for Aboriginal Census rights was ran through a vote to the whole of Australia with the good results of 91% of voters approving the change that Indigenous people now had the right to an Australian Citizenship. This was a major turning point for Australian, as it opened the eyes of many Australian’s to see how the Indigenous had a place in Australian society. This realisation led to the end of the social segregation the Indigenous people were receiving. As for the ‘Stolen Generation’, Prime Minister of 2008, Keven Rudd, apologised to the Australian Indigenous people who had been mistreated and involved in the stolen generation where families were torn
The Mabo case was a legal case held in 1992. It was named after an Aboriginal man called Eddie Mabo, who challenged Australian legal system. He fought for claiming the legal rights of Aboriginal and Torres Strait inhabitants. From Mabo’s perspective, Aboriginal people are the traditional owners of their land as they occupied and lived in Australia for thousands of years, much longer and earlier than British people’s arrival in 1788. However, after British people took charge of this continent, Aboriginal people’s life went from bad to worse. They had no legal rights and were treated like animals. Their lives were severely threatened. Moreover, they lost their homes although they were the original owner of the land. After ten years
The National Apology of 2008 is the latest addition to the key aspects of Australia’s reconciliation towards the Indigenous owners of our land. A part of this movement towards reconciliation is the recognition of Indigenous Australians and Torres Strait Islanders rights to their land. Upon arrival in Australia, Australia was deemed by the British as terra nullius, land belonging to no one. This subsequently meant that Indigenous Australians and Torres Strait Islanders were never recognised as the traditional owners. Eddie Mabo has made a highly significant contribution to the rights and freedoms of Indigenous Australians as he was the forefather of a long-lasting court case in 1982 fighting for the land rights of the Torres Strait Islanders. Eddie Mabo’s introduction of the Native Title Act has provided Indigenous Australians with the opportunity to state claim to their land, legally recognising the Indigenous and the Torres Strait Islanders as the traditional owners.
Key events in Aboriginal Australian history stem from the time Australia was first discovered in 1788. For instance, when Federation came into existence in 1901, there was a prevailing belief held by non Aboriginal Australians that the Aborigines were a dying race (Nichol, 2005:259) which resulted in the Indigenous people being excluded from the constitution except for two mentions – Section 127 excluded Aborigines from the census and Section 51, part 26, which gave power over Aborigines to the States rather than to the Federal Government. Aboriginal people were officially excluded from the vote, public service, the Armed Forces and pensions. The White Australia mentality/policy Australia as “White” and unfortunately this policy was not abolished until 1972. REFERENCE
Of the 8 successful, the 1967 referendum which proposed the removal of the words in section 51 (xxvi) ‘… other than the aboriginal people in any State’ (National Archives of Australia ND), and the deletion of section 127, both, which were discriminative in their nature toward the Aboriginal race, recorded a 90.77% nationwide vote in favour of change (National Archives of Australia, 2014). As a result, the Constitution was altered; highlighting what was believed to be significant positive political change within Indigenous affairs at the time (National Archives of Australia, 2014). Approaching 50 years on, discussion has resurfa...
Throughout the world, in history and in present day, injustice has affected all of us. Whether it is racial, sexist, discriminatory, being left disadvantaged or worse, injustice surrounds us. Australia is a country that has been plagued by injustice since the day our British ancestors first set foot on Australian soil and claimed the land as theirs. We’ve killed off many of the Indigenous Aboriginal people, and also took Aboriginal children away from their families; this is known as the stolen generation. On the day Australia became a federation in 1901, the first Prime Minister of Australia, Edmund Barton, created the White Australia Policy. This only let people of white skin colour migrate to the country. Even though Australia was the first country to let women vote, women didn’t stand in Parliament until 1943 as many of us didn’t support female candidates, this was 40 years after they passed the law in Australian Parliament for women to stand in elections. After the events of World War Two, we have made an effort to make a stop to these issues here in Australia.
Struggles by Aboriginal and Torres Strait islander people for recognition of their rights and interests have been long and arduous (Choo & Hollobach: 2003:5). The ‘watershed’ decision made by the High Court of Australia in 1992 (Mabo v Queensland) paved the way for Indigenous Australians to obtain what was ‘stolen’ from them in 1788 when the British ‘invaded’ (ATSIC:1988). The focus o...
Rudd, K. (2008, February 13). Prime Minister Kevin Rudd, MP – Apology to Australia’s Indigenous peoples [Parliament of Australia, House of Representatives]. [Transcript]. Canberra, ACT: Retrieved from http://australia.gov.au/about-australia/our-country/our-people/apology-to-australias-indigenous-peoples
The rights and freedoms achieved in Australia in the 20th and 21st century can be described as discriminating, dehumanising and unfair against the Indigenous Australians. Indigenous Australians have achieved rights and freedoms in their country since the invasion of the English Monarch in 1788 through the exploration and development of laws, referendums and processes. Firstly, this essay will discuss the effects of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights on the Indigenous Australians through dehumanising and discriminating against them. Secondly, this essay will discuss how Indigenous Australians gained citizenship and voting
Indigenous Australian land rights have sparked controversy between Non Indigenous and Indigenous Australians throughout history. The struggle to determine who the rightful owners of the land are is still largely controversial throughout Australia today. Indigenous Australian land rights however, go deeper than simply owning the land as Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders have established an innate spiritual connection making them one with the land. The emphasis of this essay is to determine how Indigenous Australian land rights have impacted Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, highlighting land rights regarding the Mabo v. the State of Queensland case and the importance behind today’s teachers understanding and including Indigenous
The Stolen Generation has had a profound impact on every aspect of the lives of Indigenous communities. It has jeopardised their very survival. It has impoverished their capacity to control and direct their future development. The Stolen Generation has corrupted, devastated and destroyed the souls, hopes and beliefs of many Australian lives through damaging assimilation policies established in an attempt to make a ‘White Australia’ possible. Discrimination, racism and prejudice are some of the many permanent scars upon Indigenous life that will never be repaired. However, recently Rudd and the Australian public have sincerely apologised for the detrimental effects the Stolen Generation had caused. The Stolen Generation has dramatically shaped Australian history and culture.
Since the time of federation the Aboriginal people have been fighting for their rights through protests, strikes and the notorious ‘day of mourning’. However, over the last century the Australian federal government has generated policies which manage and restrained that of the Aboriginal people’s rights, citizenships and general protection. The Australian government policy that has had the most significant impact on indigenous Australians is the assimilation policy. The reasons behind this include the influences that the stolen generation has had on the indigenous Australians, their relegated rights and their entitlement to vote and the impact that the policy has had on the indigenous people of Australia.
Summary of Text: ‘The Redfern Address’ is a speech that was given to a crowd made up of mainly indigenous Australians at the official opening of the United Nations International Year of the World’s Indigenous Peoples in Redfern Park, New South Wales. This text deals with many of the challenges that have been faced by Indigenous Australians over time, while prompting the audience to ask themselves, ‘How would I feel?’ Throughout the text, Keating challenges the views of history over time, outlines some of the outrageous crimes committed against the Indigenous community, and praises the indigenous people on their contribution to our nation, despite the way they have been treated.
When you think about how far as a country we have come you would be amazed. In the 1960s the Americans only knew the potential of the equal protection of the laws so that is what they followed. Not knowing that the congress would soon come up with an act that would provide even more opportunities for America. In 1964 the Congress passed an Act called the Civil Rights Act and that act is still around to this day. It has made it possible for everyone in America to have a job. The Civil Rights Act brought years of struggles to an end. It also banned discrimination in public places and as employment. Later bringing the equality to the African Americans for voting. It is considered one of the crowning legislative achievements. This act in my opinion
Barack Obama’s presidency, a 1960s fantasy and a 21st century reality, would not be possible without the movements made in the 1960s. Following the Civil War of the 1860s, the United States slowly progressed towards the need for civil rights, originally for African-Americans but advanced to include all Americans. Over the course of one hundred years, the United States Congress failed repeatedly to pass laws protecting the rights of the American people regardless of “race, color, religion, sex, or national origin.” The Civil Rights Act of 1964, a law President John F. Kennedy proposed and President Lyndon B. Johnson signed into legislation, aimed to end discrimination and was one of the most pivotal and effective pieces of legislation signed
Historically, the Civil Rights Movement was a time during the 1950’s and 60’s to eliminate segregation and gain equal rights. Looking back on all the events, and dynamic figures it produced, this description is very vague. In order to fully understand the Civil Rights Movement, you have to go back to its origin. Most people believe that Rosa Parks began the whole civil rights movement. She did in fact propel the Civil Rights Movement to unprecedented heights but, its origin began in 1954 with Brown vs. Board of Education of Topeka. Brown vs. Board of Education of Topeka was the cornerstone for change in American History as a whole. Even before our nation birthed the controversial ruling on May 17, 1954 that stated separate educational facilities were inherently unequal, there was Plessy vs. Ferguson in 1896 that argued by declaring that state laws establish separate public schools for black and white students denied black children equal educational opportunities. Some may argue that Plessy vs. Ferguson is in fact backdrop for the Civil Rights Movement, but I disagree. Plessy vs. Ferguson was ahead of it’s time so to speak. “Separate but equal” thinking remained the body of teachings in America until it was later reputed by Brown vs. Board of Education. In 1955 when Rosa Parks refused to give up her seat, and prompted The Montgomery Bus Boycott led by one of the most pivotal leaders of the American Civil Rights Movement, Martin Luther King Jr. After the gruesome death of Emmett Till in 1955 in which the main suspects were acquitted of beating, shooting, and throwing the fourteen year old African American boy in the Tallahatchie River, for “whistling at a white woman”, this country was well overdo for change.