ASSESSMENT 4: Critical response essay (preparatory activity (optional) 10% + final essay 30% = 40%) There is only one essay for this unit - a critical response to a piece of writing by a key author...

Aboriginal People- A ‘Race’-less population
Heritage is pride. There is probably no population that does not take pride in its ancestry and heritage especially a population like the Aboriginal and the Indigenous population of Australia. To the Aborigines, it defines who they are, what they stand for and how they have lived through time. In her essay “Indigenous Exceptionalism and the Constitutional ‘Race Power’”, Marcia Langton (2012) argues that defining the Aborigine Australians as a ‘race’ is racial discrimination itself. She focuses on how the change in terminology to ‘the first people’ and recognition of Aborigines as just people with different ancestors can be a great move towards normalization of the Indigenous population and accepting them as equals. The Australian constitution has been rooted in the ‘race power’. This has made many of its clauses clearly biased in terminology. The current perception of most Australians towards the Indigenous population is consequently that of a different ‘race’ that is not equal to them. In order to change this perception of inequality a simple step like changing terms from ‘race’ to ‘first people’ can change rooted attitude for a start. Even though such a change can be considered very positive, a complete actual change isn’t possible by simply the change of a word. Attitudes take a long time to change and this can be seen in the change in attitude that has taken place over the years in the Australian society, most of which has been positive.
The arguments raised by Marcia Langton are nevertheless very credible and interesting. Her understanding of the issues and beliefs of the Aboriginal and Indigenous population over a period of 50 years can be noted as a lifetime of experience. The first point raised by Langton is the lack of awareness of the general population in Australia regarding the Australian Constitution thereby magnifying the issue at hand and that is including Indigenous Australians in the National Polity while not trampling on their identity. Langton presents what she calls “a new synthesis of a powerful idea drawn from human rights theory and the Expert Panel’s work”. She wants to delete the use of ‘race’ as a description for the indigenous population, arguing that its use only brings about separation and makes the Aborigines incapable of becoming a part of the constitution. The use of the word ‘first people’ according to Langton is more likely to change thoughts towards the historical background of the Aborigines rather than treating them as a race that is naturally discriminated against. Langton also alludes to the various segregation policies used by the Australian government in the 1970’s for goals such as racial purity and racial hygiene. The effect of those policies on the Aborigines at the time was immense. There were many who tried to hide their Aborigine identity and this later trickled down to the next generation giving rise to what Langton calls ‘part-time Aborigines’ who only identify as Aborigines on papers to avail government benefits. To this effect, she identifies that not all Aborigines are disadvantaged. There are those who are even well-off and do not require the extra government benefits. In essence what Langton is advocating for is to treat Aborigines as a people who are equal to other Australians, or rather as normal Australians with just a different history. She does not debate that they should get more rights or assistance instead she demands them to be treated as a part-n-parcel of the Australian society much like any other Australian.
In the course of this demand, Langton raises many interesting and debatable points and issues, the first of these being the duality of the term ‘race’. As a word, race means ethnic background. However, in the daily use, race can be said to be a term used regarding everything racial or differential (Helms, Jernigan & Mascher, 2005). In other words, it has come to mean ‘different from us’. This duality is both deceiving and painful and thus has become the dominant demand that Langton presents to change...