The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Australia: The ‘Good’ Genocide Perpetrator?
Abstract
In 1949, federal parliamentarians were indignant when asked to ratify the United Nations Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (hereafter, UNGC). We could not in any way be associated with ‘the unthinkable’ crime, senior members claimed, because we are ‘a moral people’ with a ‘clean record'. This essay assesses the ‘decent’ Australian democrats who, as the indelible records show, set out to kill the Aboriginal people they deemed ‘vermin’ and then later, decided to engage in a eugenicist fantasy to rid Australia of Aborigines by intermarriage or, failing that, forcibly removing their children in large numbers. The colonial frontier killings were justified as ‘dispersing kangaroos'. Child removals were done ‘in their best interests'. This essay attempts to gain an insight into the mindset of those who did commit ‘the unthinkable’ crime of genocide: killing, removal of children, and ‘causing serious bodily and mental harm'. Subsequent policies infantalised the Aboriginal and Islander population and denied them basic human rights.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The early explorers' travels left their mark in the form of slaughter by microbes, child removals, and massacres - a genocide.
“However, their travels left their mark in the form of slaughter by microbes, child removals, and massacres – a genocide (Burke et al. 2016; Joyce et al. 2011; Tatz 2016; Wolfe 2006).”
From Exploratory GIS: modelling past land use and occupancy with functional connectivity, willandra lakes region world heritage area, NSW, australia (2022) · cites this paper as Tatz 2016
Citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Thomas, K. (2022) · Journal of Computer Applications in Archaeology · doi:10.5334/jcaa.98 · Cited by 1
Metadata
- Authors
- Tatz, C.
- Venue
- Health and History
- Publisher
- Project MUSE
- Published
- 2016
- Volume
- 18
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 85-98
- ISSN
- 1839-3314
- Cited by
- 1
- References
- 0
- Language
- en
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review