Would the Australian Aboriginal model work in the U.S.?
I’ve seen Australian Aborigines on shows like Survivor and especially the Croc Hunter. A lot of them live the same way they lived a thousand years ago. Yet, they are educated and talk perfect English. I recall one guy helping the Croc Hunter track some animals in the bush. He was mostly naked, feathers, and white paint. Yet he talked perfect English, was obviously educated, and loved Aussie football. I got the impression some of the Aborigines transition back and forth between city life and bush life regularly. They’ve been able to keep their culture and tribal ways alive. I realize it’s not perfect. I’m sure there’s poverty and alcohol problems too. But it doesn’t seem as prevalent as in the native U.S. tribes.
It makes me wonder if a similar approach would work with Native Americans in the U.S.?
What approach? Force them to be on TV shows and then drop them off out in the middle of nowhere to hunt Bison and live in tepees until the next acting gig comes up? There are so many problems with your OP that I don’t even have the heart to break it all to you at once.
Poverty and substance abuse in the Aboriginal community are tremendous problems in Australia. In fact, poverty is more prevalent among Australian Aborigines than Native Americans, and Australian Aborigines have lower life expectancy than Native Americans.
The shows I mentioned were not acting. The Aborigine villages were visited during the Survivor season in Australia. The other gentlemen was a professional guide hired to help Steve Irwin locate animals making a nature documentary.
Apparently some of the Aborigine have returned to living in the traditional way. That’s their choice and their birth right. Most of the Australia interior is unpopulated. They live there undisturbed just like they did a thousand years ago.
A lot of the cattle ranches in interior Australia have closed. Living out there was too harsh and they weren’t making any money. Steve visited several deserted ranches. That land is slowly be reclaimed by the Aborigine.
They can do that in the U.S. too though. The U.S. has many very large Indian reservations with free land as well. Some do live close to the old ways in the U.S. while some live a mix and some use them as segregated slums, casino land, and everything in between. They are free to live how they want but no one can force them too. The Australian Aborigines have most of the same issues in general that Native Americans do. Their picture isn’t rosy at all either.
I don’t think the Australian model is all that different from the U.S. model, and I don’t think it’s working very well for most Aboriginal people, most of whom are poor, and live in cities or country towns, not out in the bush.
There’s nothing to stop anyone from walking out into the wilderness and surviving however they can. The aborigines who do this have some specialized knowledge of their environment.
If you have the right knowledge and skills, you can do it too. What do you think is different about traditional aboriginal culture that would be allow “better” survival than traditional Native American culture?
May I suggest that you do a bit more research on Indigenous Australians? You will probably find it interesting.
Wikipedia isn’t a bad place to start. Google “stolen generations” and “aboriginal child abuse”. Here’s a pretty awful right wing take on the Aboriginal problem. I’m linking to it because many Aussies I know will bring up similar stories when the subject comes up.
There is scant evidence that it works in Australia.
I saw David Gulpilil on Crocodile Dundee, so I’m a even better informed. I’ve seen Ten Canoesas well, so that must make me a Professor of Anthropology. :smack:
Just to qualify what constitutes “a lot”
There are just over 500,000 people who identify themselves as Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders, that’s 2.5% of Australians. Of these 60,000 live in the Northern territory, typically in Darwin, Alice Springs, Katherine and other regional population centres. About 50% live in “very remote” communities, where motor vehicles, mains power, telephones, police, western diets, medical facilities are standard, though not always to acceptable standards.
So when it comes to “the same way they lived a thousand years ago” i.e. hunting without guns, or fishing without nylon nets and outboard motors, if there were more than a couple of dozen who weren’t seen exclusively on film sets, I’d be surprised. There would be 10, 100 times as many survivalists living in the USA.
Can you name just one Aboriginal who lives the way they lived thousands of years ago. Just a single name.
Of course you can’t. Such people don’t exist. Why would you possibly believe that they do? How could they possibly exist in a first world nation?
**All ** Aborigines today either work or obtain their income from social security, just like all other Australians. All Aborigines today obtain >95% of their calorific intake from European food crops and animals, just like every other Australian. All Aboriginal children for the past 40 years have been required by law to send their children to school, just like every other Australian.
The vast majority of Aborigines, I guess >99%, live in permanent houses for most of the year. A tiny minority are perpetual bums with no fixed address, though they too mostly sleep in houses. These bums of course are living a lifestyle just like any other bum, and totally unlike anything any Aboriginal would have tolerated a thousand years ago. Some Aborigines, I guess <5%, live what could be best termed semi-traditional lifestyles. These people live in houses most of the time, they eat western food most of the time, but they occasional “go walkabout” and spend a few weeks living in the bush.
The idea that even a single Aborigine alive today lives a life that is even remotely like a traditional lifestyle is romantic nonsense.
The educated Aboriginal man who seamlessly transitions between modern and traditional life is an anomaly, an exception rather than the rule. Aboriginal life expectancy is about 20 years less than the rest of the population. More than half don’t finish high school and this contributes to higher unemployment among the indigenous population. One in five of the Australian prison population is Aboriginal, even though they make up only about 2.5% of the general population. Child sexual abuse is considered to be “endemic” in remote Aboriginal communities and many programs have been set up to tackle the problem of family violence in Aboriginal communities. Drug and alcohol problems are prevalent and petrol-sniffing is a widespread problem.
Don’t try to learn from us. We haven’t done these people any favours.
You’re not going to get an accurate portrayal of any group from an incidental appearance in a TV show, and definitely not from shows as unrepentantly idiotic as the ones you mentioned.
Well, I’m puzzled. Because when you Google aborigines of australia, there’s all kinds of modern pictures of tribesmen. I’ve seen them and their villages on all sorts of documentaries. Of course, I also knew there were some trapped in slums living off welfare.
There was something on the news not long ago about the aborigines petitioning to create an independent state in the interior (unpopulated) part of Australia. That gave me the impression there was a thriving group ready to assume control of their own affairs.
<.shrug> I don’t live there. All I have to go by is what shows up on Google and the documentaries on television. I guess that’s all total bullshit.
Well survivor isn’t what I would call a documentary. To the extent that any other shows you’ve seen have given you the impression that the Aborigines of Australia live happily in the outback dancing in loin cloths then yes it’s bullshit.
You type in ‘Londoner’ and you’ll get picture of pearly kings and queens and Chelsea pensioners, neither group are particualrly representative of modern day Londoners and form an almsot negligible part of the total population of London.
Your OP was a misjudgement, the conditions and treatment of Aborigines in Australia is that countries biggest shame. Obviously you’re unaware of the problems, but they really are that bad that you’re OP almsot ceratinly caused a few jaws to drop.
I guess that means that all Indians must live in teepees and ride horses and wear feathers in their hair. Because that’s what the first 10 pages of a Google search shows. Right?
Villages? Pre-contact Aborigines were all exclusively nomadic HGs. They never lived in villages. If you saw an Aboriginal village then by definition they couldn’t have been living the lifestyle of thousands of years ago.
There most certainly is.
And the members of that group live in houses, either work or receive state support, eat European foods, watch television, listen to iPods, drive cars and so forth. That’s how you know they are thriving.
Neither “Survivor” nor “The Crocodile Hunter” are documentaries in any sense of the word. They are both polished, scripted, organised TV shows made for entertainment.
Well, yeah.
Here’s a tip. If Steve Irwin said it, it’s almost certainly bullshit.
I got the impression some of the Aborigines transition back and forth between city life and bush life regularly. They’ve been able to keep their culture and tribal ways alive. I realize it’s not perfect. I’m sure there’s poverty and alcohol problems too. But it doesn’t seem as prevalent as in the native U.S. tribes.