The appropriation of Indigenous identity by the non-Aboriginal “GuriNgai” group operating in the Northern Beaches and Central Coast regions of New South Wales (NSW) represents a form of neocolonial violence that perpetuates white possession and settler-colonial control over Aboriginal culture, Country, and community representation. Far from being a benign or misunderstood cultural movement, the GuriNgai phenomenon constitutes a deeply unethical and calculated fraud. It is characterised by false claims to Aboriginality, the fabrication of a tribal identity disconnected from any historical or anthropological evidence, and the deliberate silencing of legitimate Aboriginal voices from the region. This case is not an isolated incident but a manifestation of broader trends in settler-colonial societies where white Australians increasingly claim an Indigenous identity without community acceptance, genealogical verification, or cultural knowledge (Moreton-Robinson, 2015; Kowal, 2015).

At the heart of this appropriation is the strategic mobilisation of “GuriNgai” as a term of pseudo-tribal legitimacy. The term was never historically used by the Aboriginal peoples of the region to identify themselves, nor does it appear in early ethnographic records as the name of a cohesive group or polity (Attenbrow, 2010; Tindale, 1974). Instead, its modern usage is rooted in mid-to-late 20th-century reimaginings of Aboriginal identity by non-Indigenous actors who sought to “fill the gap” left by colonisation through the invention of a localised Aboriginal identity into which they could insert themselves. As detailed on Guringai.org (2025a), this reinvention of “GuriNgai” as an ethno-cultural identity has been weaponised by individuals and organisations—many with no Aboriginal ancestry—who claim custodianship over land, culture, and ceremony without community mandate. The result is an erosion of the legal and moral authority of legitimate Aboriginal community-controlled organisations and Elders.

This fraudulent appropriation must be understood in the context of what Aileen Moreton-Robinson (2015) terms “white possession.” The GuriNgai group’s claims to authenticity rely on colonial logics of entitlement, wherein whiteness continues to assert ownership over Indigenous lands and identities through symbolic and performative means. Through events, cultural workshops, grant-funded enterprises, and lobbying of local governments, these self-identified “GuriNgai” figures insert themselves into spaces of cultural authority and decision-making. Their activities are not merely culturally disrespectful but materially damaging, as they undermine Aboriginal land rights, disrupt processes of truth-telling and treaty-making, and create confusion within the broader public as to who speaks for Country.

The phenomenon also intersects with what scholars are increasingly referring to as “settler conspirituality,” a fusion of spiritual appropriation, conspiracy culture, and far-right ethno-nationalist ideologies (Asprem & Dyrendal, 2021; Guringai.org, 2025b). The GuriNgai group and its affiliates have been linked to such conspiratorial networks, adopting language of “ancient knowledge,” “hidden truths,” and “sacred lands” in ways that trivialise, exoticise, and distort Aboriginal spiritual beliefs. This syncretic settler spirituality often mirrors the tropes used by pseudoarchaeological movements, which similarly seek to displace Aboriginal custodianship with imagined histories and mystical narratives that centre whiteness and settler entitlement (Salazar, 2020).

The harms caused by this identity fraud are extensive. As outlined by Guringai.org (2025a), these include the illegitimate claiming of government funding intended for Aboriginal peoples; the displacement of real Aboriginal people from consultative and representative roles; and the growing hesitancy of institutions to engage with Aboriginal issues out of fear of being drawn into intra-community conflict—conflict which, in many cases, has been artificially generated by fraudulent actors. Furthermore, these false claims create barriers for Aboriginal communities in seeking justice and recognition, forcing them to divert time and resources toward rebutting fraudulent claims rather than advancing cultural resurgence, land return, and self-determination.

The activities of the non-Aboriginal GuriNgai group must therefore be recognised as a clear case of Indigenous identity fraud. As such, they demand a strong response from both government and community. The legitimacy of Aboriginal identity must be grounded in community acceptance, cultural continuity, and verifiable descent—not self-identification or ancestry.com-style claims. Cultural authority cannot be self-appointed. Institutions must cease legitimising fraudulent individuals and organisations by awarding them grants, inviting them into advisory roles, or treating them as traditional custodians. A robust and community-led mechanism for verifying Aboriginal identity and protecting Aboriginal cultural heritage is urgently required, in line with Article 33 of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (United Nations, 2007), which affirms the right of Indigenous Peoples to determine their own identity and membership.

In sum, the GuriNgai group’s appropriation of Aboriginal identity is not an anomaly but a highly visible example of the broader settler-colonial refusal to relinquish control over Indigenous lands, cultures, and narratives. It represents an ideological and material continuation of colonisation in a contemporary guise, masked in the language of reconciliation, spirituality, and “local culture.” Unmasking this fraud and restoring cultural authority to rightful Aboriginal custodians is not only a matter of justice, but of decolonisation.

References

Asprem, E., & Dyrendal, A. (2021). Conspirituality reconsidered: How magical thinking meets political extremism. In J. R. Lewis & I. B. Tøllefsen (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of new religious movements: Volume II (pp. 367–386). Oxford University Press.

Attenbrow, V. (2010). Sydney’s Aboriginal past: Investigating the archaeological and historical records (2nd ed.). UNSW Press.

Guringai.org. (2025a, January 28). Implications of Indigenous Identity Appropriation & Fraud: The “Guringai” of the Northern Beaches and Central Coast regions of NSW. https://guringai.org/2025/01/28/implications-of-indigenous-identity-appropriation-fraud-the-guringai-of-the-northern-beaches-and-central-coast-regions-of-nsw/

Guringai.org. (2025b, May 21). White Possession, Settler Conspirituality and the Guringai Cult: Indigenous Identity Fraud as Neocolonial Violence in Contemporary Australia. https://guringai.org/2025/05/21/white-possession-settler-conspirituality-and-the-guringai-cult-indigenous-identity-fraud-as-neocolonial-violence-in-contemporary-australia/

Kowal, E. (2015). Trapped in the gap: Doing good in Indigenous Australia. Berghahn Books.

Moreton-Robinson, A. (2015). The white possessive: Property, power, and Indigenous sovereignty. University of Minnesota Press.

Salazar, N. B. (2020). Momentous mobilities: Anthropological musings on the meanings of travel and movement. Berghahn Books.

Tindale, N. B. (1974). Aboriginal tribes of Australia: Their terrain, environmental controls, distribution, limits, and proper names. Australian National University Press.

United Nations. (2007). United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. https://www.un.org/development/desa/indigenouspeoples/declaration-on-the-rights-of-indigenous-peoples.html