Having been born at the tail end of the baby boom, it was inevitable I would grow up heavily indoctrinated in the white-armband view of Australian history.
I, and an entire generation, were force-fed an ideology that borrowed heavily from the American concept of "manifest destiny" and dismissed the 60,000 years before 1770 as a footnote. It is no wonder so many Anglo Australians of my vintage are triggered when the frontier wars are brought up or some brave soul argues for their recognition in the Australian War Memorial.
The instinctive response is to dismiss this as a blood libel on the courageous explorers, colonists, squatters and early settlers who forged a nation out of a wilderness sparsely populated by people dismissed by Pauline Hanson as the "most primitive" on earth.
Today I find it sadly comic that I and my peers accepted without question that Captain Cook had "discovered" a land that was home to the oldest surviving culture on the planet.
The well-documented massacre at Myall Creek, with its tragic epilogue involving the rape, torture and murder of a young Wirrayaraay woman, Ipeta, was either unimportant, best forgotten, or not fit for young ears.
A demographic study released this month revised the pre-1788 population baseline to more than 2.2 million Indigenous Australians; far more than the previously accepted figure of "no more than 795,000 and probably less than half that".
According to Professor Corey Bradshaw and Professor Lynette Russell, there were 2.06 million "excess deaths" between 1788 and 1861. They were the result of European diseases, starvation after being driven off traditional lands, and frontier violence.
Historians are revising the death toll from settler violence upwards by almost an order of magnitude. The old estimate that about 20,000 Indigenous people and between 2000 and 5000 colonists were killed has gone out the window. It is now believed the actual Indigenous death toll was more than 100,000.
While such findings are hotly contested, especially by those with a vested interest in the demonisation of today's Indigenous community as the author of its own misfortunes, they are based on research by respected academics and have been subject to peer review.
This dark tale, which raises the question of how it is possible to deny that the Indigenous population was waging an existential war for its own survival, has a postscript that belongs in a horror movie. But that is a tale for another day.
What really gets up my nose is the way armchair experts quibble over whether or not the genocide on the frontiers meets a fabricated and Eurocentric definition of a "war". The consensus on the conservative right is that because the army was not involved on the European side and that the Indigenous resistance did not meet their OED definition of a military force this was not a war - regardless of the body count.
That is one of the most blatant examples of the victors writing the history books I have ever encountered. Teleology, the philosophical technique used to explain and define an action by looking at its actual intent or purpose, makes this very clear.
The European perspective is that the process of settlement was manifest destiny writ large.
But from the other end of the spear, the intent was very different. From the Indigenous perspective the purpose of the violence was the erasure of their sovereignty, their way of life and their survival. They were fighting for the right to exist. The only accurate word for that reality is "war".
While there is an argument that the legislation that established the Australian War Memorial does not allow for more than token recognition of those who fell in the frontier wars, there is a simple fix for that. Legislation can be amended.
HAVE YOUR SAY: Should the frontier wars be given significantly more recognition at the Australian War Memorial? Have your views on this topic changed over time? Email us: [email protected]
SHARE THE LOVE: If you enjoy The Echidna, forward it to a friend so they can sign up, too.
IN CASE YOU MISSED IT:
- Treasurer Jim Chalmers on Monday unveiled the 2026 Intergenerational Report. He described AI as one of five "accelerating shifts" that would have an outsized influence on Australia's economy.
- Apple has been ordered to pay a former worker $18,000 after a tribunal found he experienced indirect discrimination over bathroom access at the company's Canberra store.
- A mother who allegedly killed one of her young children and critically injured two others in a stabbing attack could face homicide charges if she recovers from her injuries, police say.
THEY SAID IT: "Australia's inwardly focused immigration debate is a tawdry exercise heaving with more politics than policy. It comes against a backdrop of 'accelerating global change'." Mark Kenny, columnist
YOU SAID IT: John Hanscombe's rant on the evils of social media and rage baiting struck a chord.
Tony of Malua Bay wrote: "John, in answer to your three questions: No; Probably; Yes. I note further that 'rage bait' was the OUP word (singular) of the year for 2025. I don't know if they considered slopaganda, surely a close etymological relative, but maybe it could be given a late run as word of the year for 2026."
Maggie told us: "You have just reminded me why I avoid social media and stick to closed chat groups. And polls? Even the Change.org ones can be puerile, and I select what to support."
But, on the other hand, this from Murray: "Indeed, social media in some ways is a more honest and accurate source of information than the so-called mainstream media. I just saw a current federal voting intention poll. One Nation 30 per cent. Labor 27 per cent. Liberals 19 per cent. And yet the media still persist in referring to Labor and the Liberals as the 'two major parties'. I don't know whether they assume we are blind or just simple."
And Stuart told us: "No, I don't participate in social media and haven't for six years now. Yes, I think it does more harm than good and I refuse any contact with influencers. Simple as that."
Meanwhile Daniel has tuned out: "What polls? Never seen them, dear Echidna. I deleted all my 'anti'-social media apps ages ago. I've never been happier. My eyeballs will only look where I want."
And the comments are still coming on Garry Linnell's essay on owning an older dog.
Judi says home is where the pet is: "I am the mum of a beautiful greyhound (Penny) who is eight years old and a gorgeous 12-year-old Russian Blue cat (Mischa). I am praying that we all leave this world around the same time. I have always had pets ... I grieve for all the far too many pets I have lost in my 80-odd years but a house without a pet is not a real home. Loved your column."
David Ellery is a senior ACM writer, filling in for John Hanscombe while he seeks some sunlight outside the burrow.
