Found a word you're not familiar with? Double-click that word to bring up a dictionary reference to it. The dictionary page includes an audio sound file with which to actually hear the word said.


Further implications

Indigenous cultural dislocation
Cross-cultural understanding and mutual respect is difficult to achieve for any post-colonial society founded by a civilisation of conquest. Having been conquered is an existential challenge for any indigenous population and culture. This was and is true for Australia's Indigenous inhabitants.
The British and more broadly the European values of the conquering culture established since 1788 have substantially determined Australia's national values, leaving Indigenous Australians struggling to retain their original languages and culture. Their marginality has been intensified by their frequent economic dependence on the white, Western society which has largely displaced their own.
The measures of achievement in Australian society are Western, materialistic measures which do not sit well with Indigenous Australian values centring on group obligation and support. Though the traditional values of urban Indigenous Australians have been severely challenged, they have retained a strong sense of the importance of family and kinship group. Despite this, racial prejudice, family disruption, loss of culture, loss of connection with the land, unemployment, poverty, ill health, poor diet, substance abuse and incomplete conventional education have created a nexus of disadvantage within which many urban Indigenous Australians are trapped.

Remote Indigenous populations able to preserve traditional language
The position of Indigenous Australians living in remote areas is somewhat different. Indigenous Australians living in remote areas have a greater opportunity to retain their traditional culture as they have relatively less association with non-Indigenous Australians. The 2001 census indicated 'while their total numbers are relatively small as a proportion of the total population, Indigenous peoples constitute 28.8% of the total population of the Northern Territory.' The same census indicated 'While the majority of Indigenous people live in either major cities, or...regional areas of Australia, the proportion of [Indigenous] people that live in remote or very remote areas is much higher than for the non-Indigenous population.' In circumstances such as these, remote Indigenous communities in the Northern Territory have a greater opportunity to retain their traditional language and connection with the land than Indigenous Australians in other areas. 55% of those living in remote areas reported speaking an Indigenous language, compared with one per cent in urban centres.

Socio-economic disadvantage worse in remote Indigenous communities
Despite better retention of language and by extension culture, the socio-economic position of Indigenous Australians living in remote areas is markedly worse than that of non-Indigenous Australians and worse than that of Indigenous Australians living in urban and regional Australia. Using disadvantage indices such as poverty, unemployment and restricted formal education, the 2011 census shows there was no single area in Australia where the Indigenous population had better or even relatively equal outcomes compared with the non-Indigenous population. The gap between the two populations was smallest in city and regional rural areas (37-38 percentage points) and highest in Indigenous towns (89 percentage points) and remote dispersed settlements (81 percentage points).

Preserving culture, promoting understanding and improving physical quality of life
The figures referred to above indicate a startling disjunction in remote Indigenous communities. In precisely those areas where Indigenous Australians have been best able to retain elements of their culture, their physical and social living circumstances (as measured by indices such as wealth, employment, formal education, housing, physical and mental health and longevity) are the worst. No causal relationship is implied here, just a clear statement of the fact that the areas within which Indigenous Australians have been most able to preserve their culture are also those areas least conducive to their having a standard of living comparable to that of a majority of Australians.
This dilemma is the background to the desire of the local Anangu people to have their culture respected in the management of the Uluru-Kata Tjuta National Park while at the same time converting it into something which will improve their physical quality of life. Their closure of the rock for climbing is also an attempt to educate that non-Indigenous Australia about the beliefs and values of Indigenous Australians.

Sammy Wilson's Statement
The speech delivered by Sammy Wilson, the Chairman of the Uluru-Kata Tjuta National Park Board, explaining why climbing Uluru will be banned, contains a number of important statements.
Firstly it stresses the importance of Indigenous cultural law to the traditional owners of the land now referred to as the Uluru-Kata Tjuta National Park. It alludes to their belief system and to what this dictates in terms of how the land should be treated. ' This is a sacred place restricted by law... Some people, in tourism and government for example, might have been saying we need to keep it open but it's not their law that lies in this land.'
Secondly, it is a plea for non-Indigenous people 'to understand that country has meaning that needs to be respected'. It is a request that non-Indigenous Australians learn to appreciate the land rather than attempt to conquer it. 'If you walk around here you will learn this and understand. If you climb you won't be able to.' It is also a plea for respect and understanding of the traditional owners. 'We can't control everything you do but if you walk around here you will start to understand us.'
Thirdly it is a statement requesting that the Anangu people receive government funding that will allow them to establish further centres to educate non-Indigenous people in the value of their culture. ' We want support from the government to hear what we need and help us. We have a lot to offer in this country. There are so many other smaller places that still have cultural significance that we can share publicly. So instead of tourists feeling disappointed in what they can do here they can experience the homelands with Anangu and really enjoy the fact that they learnt so much more about culture.'
Finally, it is a rejection of Western materialism and an assertion of the value of a spiritually based culture. ' Whitefellas see the land in economic terms where Anangu see it as Tjukurpa. If the Tjukurpa is gone so is everything. We want to hold on to our culture. If we don't it could disappear completely in another 50 or 100 years. We have to be strong to avoid this.'

Wilson's explanation reveals the tensions experienced by those attempting to live within a culture very different from their own. He is requesting government funding to establish additional centres that will promote tourist experiences that are in accord with Indigenous culture. He, and those on whose behalf he speaks, do not want to have to forfeit their traditional beliefs in order to attract investment and paying visitors.
It is an awkward compromise the Anangu are attempting to achieve - fostering respect for their non-materialistic minority tradition within a predominantly materialistic mainstream culture. It is the position most indigenous peoples find themselves in - finding an acceptable accommodation with a dominant settler culture.
A related challenge faces non-Indigenous Australians. If an accommodation cannot be found, Wilson is correct. Indigenous values and beliefs will cease to exist and both Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians will be spiritually and culturally diminished.