An Indigenous understanding of Reciprocity
Reciprocity is an underlying principle expressed throughout Aboriginal societies. Outline and illustrate the importance of this fundamental concept in the economic, social, spiritual and political spheres of Aboriginal life (refer to reciprocity in the index to Edwards 2005).
The word ‘reciprocity’1 conjures up a feel good image of ‘caring and sharing’ (Schwab 1995: 8). However according to Peterson (1993: 861) there is a darker more sinister side to this word when applied to Indigenous Australians. He defines it as ‘demand sharing’ rather than reciprocity and he states that Blurton Jones (1987: 38) labels it tolerated theft2. Peterson (1993: 860) goes on to assert that little ‘giving’ is purely altruistic because the giver might simply be protecting themselves from ‘pay-back’ if they do not give, or be expecting some mutual benefit. Edwards (2004:76) espouses that white Australians disregarded the reciprocity of traditional territorial rights and misunderstood the code of mutuality in social relationships. They also failed to identify the privileges and responsibilities central to Aboriginal society based on relationship and reciprocity (Edwards 2004: 124).
In order to enter a discussion on reciprocity with regard to our Indigenous culture, it must be looked at on two levels. First how reciprocity is a central principle that has pervaded Aboriginal societies for millennia and secondly the impact that reciprocity with the Western culture has had on this Indigenous community, since the advent of Colonisation. The Western way generally requires the borrower to formulate a case of need, whereas the Aboriginal approach is slanted towards the giver having to explain why he cannot give (Schwab 1995: 8). However there is an increasing recognition that mutual benefit worked better within the Indigenous community when Aboriginals were hunter gatherers than it seems to in today’s welfare society. Schwab (1995: title page) leans towards this realisation in his discussion
The word ‘reciprocity’1 conjures up a feel good image of ‘caring and sharing’ (Schwab 1995: 8). However according to Peterson (1993: 861) there is a darker more sinister side to this word when applied to Indigenous Australians. He defines it as ‘demand sharing’ rather than reciprocity and he states that Blurton Jones (1987: 38) labels it tolerated theft2. Peterson (1993: 860) goes on to assert that little ‘giving’ is purely altruistic because the giver might simply be protecting themselves from ‘pay-back’ if they do not give, or be expecting some mutual benefit. Edwards (2004:76) espouses that white Australians disregarded the reciprocity of traditional territorial rights and misunderstood the code of mutuality in social relationships. They also failed to identify the privileges and responsibilities central to Aboriginal society based on relationship and reciprocity (Edwards 2004: 124).
In order to enter a discussion on reciprocity with regard to our Indigenous culture, it must be looked at on two levels. First how reciprocity is a central principle that has pervaded Aboriginal societies for millennia and secondly the impact that reciprocity with the Western culture has had on this Indigenous community, since the advent of Colonisation. The Western way generally requires the borrower to formulate a case of need, whereas the Aboriginal approach is slanted towards the giver having to explain why he cannot give (Schwab 1995: 8). However there is an increasing recognition that mutual benefit worked better within the Indigenous community when Aboriginals were hunter gatherers than it seems to in today’s welfare society. Schwab (1995: title page) leans towards this realisation in his discussion
References: Sercombe, H 2005, The survival of the indigenous economy: Theoretical approaches [online]. Ngoonjook, No. 27, 2005: 63-75. http://search.informit.com.au.ezlibproxy.unisa.edu.au/documentSummary;dn=895738122253673;res=IELIND> ISSN: 1039-8236