RSS Feed
This piece was contributed by Sandra Mundine.
John Howard’s nomination and subsequent rejection by the ICC has stirred up a whole lot of muck, and there seem to be two main streams of thought in Australia.
The first is “hahahahaha serves him right”.
The second is “regardless of whether you love or hate him, he is a solid cricket fan and his nomination should at least go to the vote”.
I’m going to state straight out that I’m of the latter category. I was no fan of the man, but does that mean that he should be barred from pursuing any other professional interests? A lesson I learnt by watching Project Runway (apart from how to “make it work”) was that even when you don’t like someone and think they’re a complete boofhead, you have to admit that sometimes they’re the best person for the job. This is one of those instances.
All of the above is just a quick summary of my view so that I can get to the real meat of this piece, which isn’t about John Howard and isn’t about Zimbabwe and isn’t about cricket, but is about the rampant paranoia and, dare I say it, racism seemingly sweeping the Indian media for the benefit of their own bottom line and to satisfy some urge to turn Australian into the villain.
Regardless of what you think of the attacks on Indian students, and regardless of whether you believe there is a strong underlying sentiment of racism in the white Australian population, hopefully you can still recognise the irony of the following statement:
“The Indian media says John Howard’s nomination for the ICC’s vice-presidency means racism is part of the Australian DNA”.
Need I say more? Not only is it the ridiculous idea that Howard wanting to be on the board of an international committee for CRICKET mean that Australia is racist (what?) but also stating that a particular personality trait is part of a particular racial group’s DNA is, in itself, a racist comment. How can I tell? Well here’s a little ‘racism test’ I like to apply:
1. Is the statement based around a particular adjective? (e.g. dirty, lazy, smart, dumb, smelly, criminal, small-penised)
2. Is the statement applied across an entire race or nationality, or does it imply that the trait is usual to that race or nationality?
3. If somebody said the same thing about your race or nationality, would you be offended or affronted?
Of course, not all statements can so easily be deduced according to the above. For example, telling someone to stop being “such a” whatever-their-race-is, or using a race as an insult implies that being that race is a negative thing and is therefore a racist affront. Saying that all American girls are sluts (as I was once told while overseas) beautifully combines both racism and sexism yet doesn’t use an adjective, but I’m sure you know when a noun is used as a negative adjective and this is a good example.
Here’s a quick lesson in international studies: Every country and every race has its jerks. Every country and every race has extremists. Every country and every race has people who think that country is for ‘them’ and their ‘type’. Every country and every race has people who want to minimise the rights of women and minority groups. Every country and every race has people who are just plain racist and proud of it. Here’s the kicker: Every country and every race has journos looking to sell their wares using extreme headlines, stereotypes, and gross exaggerations of (often unchecked) fact.
India and Australia are the same in this way. If Australian papers published something saying “being a slut is in the American DNA”, as my foreign acquaintances appeared to believe, then would you not expect the papers to be rounded on and criticised? We shouldn’t be scared to take them on and say “You know what, no we’re not all racist and we’re not all bigots, and we don’t appreciate being racially stereotyped by you or anyone else”. Criticising that kind of editorial approach isn’t us being racist, it’s us standing up for ourselves.
What we find is that the Indian media’s attack on both Howard and Australia as a whole has gone beyond bringing attention to an important issue in society at large. It has instead morphed into a blatant opportunity to sell papers using a racial stereotype with which the Indian people are now familiar and about which they are concerned. This doesn’t make India unique, it just makes it as messed up as the rest of the world, and just as deserving of a kick up the bum when journalistic standards fail.
This piece was contributed by Sandra Mundine.
Sandra, thanks for a thought-provoking piece. I find myself with one foot in each of the camps.
I tend to think that all professional sport is rigged and I don’t care who runs it because I have time only for gentler passtimes. My personal Tour de Botany Bay is a lazy 24km of flat riding with a coffee break in the middle.
As for the man himself, I would not walk across the street to piss on Howard if he caught fire, but the ICC not voting at all shows a closed-mindedness that refuses to consider whether he could add value to the administration of the sport. Does anyone give a rats about what our other living former PMs are doing, so long as they stay out of the way ?
As far as the general question of whether racism is in our DNA, I think that it’s not specifically racism so much as a keen sense of difference. I believe that humans are essentially tribal. Our wired-in “world” might be say 40 to 100 families living in close proximity with a lot of common ancestry. We trust those we know – or manage our level of distrust for practical purposes.
We are naturally wary of other tribes because experience (no doubt captured in our DNA too) tells us that other tribes routinely steal our food and resources, kill or enslave our menfolk and rape our women and bowl with unacceptable arm actions. We see their different faces and skin colour; we hear their different language and we are naturally wary. We look for the slightest signal that they may be hostile. Notice the “we” and “they”, the “us” and “them” language.
For me, racism goes beyond the recognition of difference, it is acting on this inbuilt wariness to the detriment of both the “other” and also ourselves in the absence of good reason. It is, as I think you suggest, a more systematic classification of all members of a different tribe according to a real (based on personal experience) or perceived lowest common denominator.
This raises the question about whether the people who acted (in my view unfairly) against John Howard feel they have a specific good reason, or whether they just discriminate against the man because he’s a nasty little white turd. The ABC as one commentator suggested – thought the reason for discriminating against him might be Howard’s white stand against a black Mugabe. Since the ICC chose not to give reasons, nobody can say. But I suspect that it goes deeper than that. I remember with considerable shame, Tampa, and the Pacific Solution – not a high water mark in inter-racial brotherhood on Howard’s watch.
Others have suggested that Howard (the worst actual player of the game in living memory)accusing Muralitheran of having a chucking action (Yes he DOES) was considered to be too offensive to ignore. I think this is pure bull but could suggest that the Indians are flexing their muscles and saying in effect that THEY will decide what goes from here on in. Power and wealth.
Maybe if the ACB nominated Aden Ridgeway they could have a very capable and experienced politician with even a decent bowling action. I dunno. And I don’t much care as far as cricket goes.
But I have to say that another one in the eye for Howard is almost as satisfying for me as when the good people of Bennelong chucked out their sitting Prime Minister.
I’m glad I’m not the only one who can see the incredible hypocrisy, irony and double standards of the Indian media’s accusation that Australians are a racist people. The very fact that they are generalising and tarring all Australians with the same brush is itself a racist attitude to take.
The problem with Australians, however, is that we’re in the grip of political correctness. We feel that if we speak out in our defence, if we turn around and say “hey wait a minute, you guys are the ones being racist here”, that in itself would be a racist action, which is pure crap of course. And so we don’t defend ourselves, which only helps to confirm the accusations in the minds of many.
I was relieved to hear Gillard encourage Australians to not be scared to honestly speak their minds on the border protection issue, pointing out that doing so wasn’t a racist thing to do. The fact is Australia is a tolerant and multicultural society made up largely of migrants, whether from Britain, Asia, or wherever. We’ve got to stop letting fear prevent us from defending ourselves against the lies and the slurs. Our media has a huge part to play in this, but they seem largely absent from the debate, instead mostly sensationally echoing the Indian media’s sentiments.
While it’s easy for me to believe the Indian media’s campaign to discredit Australia is itself a purely racist act, I can’t help but cynically think there might be another agenda behind it.
I agree that it’s a bit of both. There are people on all sides who are happy to call this Howard’s karma (I have to confess so some sly satisfaction) but everyone is jumping to conclusions. Isn’t it possible that he wasn’t chosen simply on the basis of him never having had anything to do with sport or sports administration? Maybe they feel it takes a little more than simply being a “cricket tragic” to do the job. I like REM but I couldn’t manage the band, you know?
As a fair skinned indigenous person living in this country I believe I have a pretty unique insight into racism here, especially against indigenous people. I came to the conclusion a long time ago (around the age of 16) that the vast majority of white people I have encountered living in Australia harbor some kind of resentment towards ethnic minorities. In fact, growing up in Townsville meant that if I refused to associate with people who had expressed racist views in the past (often directly to me) I would have far less mates then I do now. Ive had bosses accuse all aboriginals of being worthless, metho drinking alcoholics in front of me, Ive had extended relatives refer to me as ‘half coon’ to my face. The only people who claim that Australia is a multi cultural, racially harmonious society are white. Good on the Indians for sticking it to Howard. That dog deserves everything he gets.
Racism is one thing, prejudice is another. We all can be prejudicial at any given time for any number of reasons or perceptions. That is in the dna of all of us, and has been since time immemorial.
Agreed Victoria.
When I think who benefits from said publications deeming us all as ‘whatever’, racism appears as political/MSM word which attempts to reset incremental class standards. In fighting is good for MSM business and govt manipulation. The mob through the Internet and hence into the full world are beginning to see what’s going on and I think the ruling class are getting nervous.
Relevant to topic at hand is a video of John Pilger and what he thinks is going on in journalism. http://www.democracynow.org/2010/6/29/john_pilger_there_is_a_war
NATO – as the father of four indigenous children, I have to say I have witnessed just as much racism from within the indigenous community as I have from without. The ostracising crabology of “you think you’re white!” hurled at those within the indigenous community who try to improve their lot sickens me greatly. The fact is every community, every nation, every race has members who are racist, but it’s an enormous leap to say for instance “the vast majority of white people” are racist. Such a statement only breeds resentment, which in turn can then become a self-fulfilling prophecy. What a shame.
Tassie Dave, I never claimed that aboriginal communities are free from racism – far from it as you pointed out. My mother is one of the most racist people I know of. But she has her reasons – being raised on Palm Island she was subject to conditions that would be unacceptable on the mainland in any white community, yet ignored by the Queensland government for generations. She grew up with segregation and institutionalized racism. Her family were poisoned with alcohol so they would remain subdued and oh boy did they take to it – generations of undiagnosed mental illness suppressed with alcoholism have left Mum with PTSD and the lack of a sober mother figure rendered her incapable of raising a child of her own. She is a broken woman let down and left behind by her government. I imagine many indigenous people can relate to her experience and many would hold contempt for the white man who, as far as they are concerned have manage to destroy a culture that lasted over 60 000 years within 200 years and a handful of generations. I can sympathize with this view. however, I find it hard to grasp where the racism in white communities I have encountered comes from. in my experience it goes hand in hand with a kind of arrogance that says to them that indigenous people are beneath them. they were living in the stone age when the whites got here and they want nothing more then to return to their primitive way of life. I acknowledge that there are whites in the community who feel as passionate about exposing and removing racist elements from Australian society as myself, its just that the vast majority just don’t care. they haven’t cared for the past 200 years and they probably wont even notice as Australian indigenous history is confined to the text books.
I wouldn’t say the majority of Australians don’t care, I think it’s more a case of out of sight, out of mind. Given the small percentage of the population that is Aboriginal, most Australians, white or otherwise, wouldn’t personally know an indigenous person and probably don’t live near one either. Most Australians probably actually do care about the plight of our country’s original inhabitants, but as with most issues in society that don’t directly impact our lives, they trust the government to fairly and effectively attend to the issue. That the government doesn’t is sadly not surprising, but that’s a whole different issue.
Victoria (below) points out that prejudices and racism are two different things. Prejudice is often shallow, thoughtless and based on ignorance. True racism is, I believe, a much deeper-seated thing. Thankfully, positive actions and education can change prejudice.
Tassie Dave, I agree completely with your assertion that it is most likely a case of out of sight out of mind that has lead to the disparity in indigenous health and mainstream health that we find today. What this says to me though, is that Australians are apathetic and individualistic. The information and statistics are readily available on government websites. everyday we are bombarded with images from rural communities showing dilapidated houses, stray dogs and burnt out cars. we hear stories of pedophile rings and chronic drug and alcohol abuse. extensive ad campaigns point out the difference in life expectancy and overall quality of life. Australians are aware of these things, that is undeniable, but because most Australians don’t interact with indigenous people on a day to day basis they pretend the issue isn’t as important as say petrol prices, asylum seeker intake levels or the economy (just to name a few of the populist issues perpetually circulated in the media). I just find it hard to accept that in a highly educated 21st century state, considered to have amongst the best standard of living anywhere in the world and complete freedom of media, citizens can display such astounding apathy not only to the plight of indigenous people but also to desperate asylum seekers. we seem to be hurtling away from our egalitarian, socially conscious European roots (my father is an Englishman) and becoming the 51st state of the United States where the focus is on the individual (although it must be said their record when it comes to indigenous health is vastly superior to Australia’s).
Yes,Sandra,such crude stereotyping shows that India has a hatemongering Rightwing mainstream media,just like ours. That’s what you get in market capitalist societies where, by definition,the media is Rightwing because that is what the owners of the media, the moneyed classes, want. Here the hatemongering is directed at Moslems, Aborigines, refugees, welfare recipients, trade unionists, gays,environmentalists etc. Indeed,ironically enough, such hatemongering was a standard operating procedure of Howardism, so he is simply getting some of his own medicine back. Rightwing societies practice this virulent propagation of hatred because it mirrors the psychopathology of the rulers, who truly hate most of the rest of humanity, and because fomenting hatred is seen as effective in garnering votes, and because it is a useful tactic to take the serfs minds of their deepening immiseration. As their life prospects crumble, as their pensions are looted and retirement postponed more and more, the ‘losers’ must never, ever,blame those really responsible amongst the predator classes,but instead, displace their hatred onto the ‘usual suspects’ that they have been trained to hate by the Rightwing media over decades.
That said,the attempt to impose Howard,a man, in my opinion justly,reviled throughout the non-Western world for his support for apartheid, his resort to racist pandering to gain votes and his role in the genocide in Iraq, was Western racist arrogance at its most undisguised. Howard and his legions of fellow haters might be agitated over his deserved rejection,but that just makes it all the more delicious.
What this says to me though, is that Australians are apathetic and individualistic.
You have no argument from me on that one Nato. As for society being bombarded with images and statistics of the indigenous plight, we live in a multimedia world in which people receive a constant flood of information, advertising, news, issues, etc. I agree that people will pay most attention to those issues they believe impact them personally, and those that are most sensational. The brutal reality is that the aboriginal issue is neither fresh nor new and so doesn’t have the impact it should. The public has become desensitised to it.
Another brutal truth, I believe, is the feeling that successive governments have thrown large amounts of money at the problem and failed. While some blame is levelled at those governments, people also blame the aboriginal people themselves for wasting multiple opportunities. Now bear with me here Nato, I’m not saying this is right or wrong, simply playing devil’s advocate. People have watched news reports going back decades talking about the money spent on the issue, then showing images of aboriginal communities with smashed up houses, stripped vehicles, broken glass up and down the streets, and they get thinking – why do these people destroy their own homes? Why do they choose to drink to excess? Why do they commit so much violence against each other? And all this leads to the perception that how can you help people who don’t want to help themselves? Right, wrong, simplistic or ignorant, that perception is out there.
None of which makes Australians inherently racist, just normal people, sad as that may be.
On the indigenous issue Nato, change needs to happen but it’s not going to come from a merry-go-round of successive governments continuing to throw money at the issue with a long line of new gimmicks. True change must happen from within indigenous society, not from without, which as we know just doesn’t work. The very justified bitterness, anger and even hatred that derives from injustice over generations must not be instilled in the younger generations, that self-defeating chain must be broken. The peer group pressure crabology that prevents young indigenous people from trying to improve their peoples’ lot has to stop, and instead such efforts encouraged and praised by their elders and families. For peer group pressure is a much more powerful thing in the indigenous community, where families are much closer and tight-knit than in Anglo-Celtic Australia. True change will only happen from within. Make enough noise and the government will supply the resources. It can happen. It won’t of course happen overnight, but it is possible.
Tassie Dave, as you pointed out throwing money at the problem wont solve it. A whole new bureaucratic class has been created by the N.T intervention. The only job creation is for white bureaucrats. Hundreds of millions of dollars have been set aside for construction of houses and service delivery but all we see is inaction. even when there are success stories (and there are plenty out there) the media ignores them. How much footage have we seen of appreciative aborigines in their communities? zilch. That kind of success story doesn’t sell papers, pedophile rings do.
I feel that the current hysteria sweeping the nation validates my argument. I am embarrassed that it has come to this. I understand that the current refugee debate is being propagated by the media but jesus man, the Australian public are the ones who buy the papers and tune into the ‘news’, we can put our feet down and say enough is enough but nobody will. The sad part is that this ‘issue’ will sway many a vote. It will be left to the very few journalists with integrity in this country to point out how ridiculous this situation is and how pathetic we look on the international stage right now.
The out of sight out of mind theory may apply to indigenous health but what reasoning is there behind the current refugee debate? refugee intake levels have absolutely no affect on the majority of our day to day happenings yet vast sums of people feel that they are being ’swamped’ by refugees and that they are entitled to services that average Australians miss out on. Most Australians wont have day to day interaction with refugees yet the country as a whole appears to feel very passionate about ’securing the borders’. What possible reason, other then xenophobia and racism could there be for this?
For me personally it is becoming ever more embarrassing to identify and relate to Australians. We seem set on a path that will see us alienate ourselves from the rest of Asia.
Asia is inhabited by Asians, we need to grow the f**k up and deal with it.
yes we are racist. The taxi driver who drove me home from the airport tonight told me a story about 4 kids he picked ip on a fare from the city to hornsby – who all bolted into a unit block without paying the fare. The foreign born taxi driver called the police. When they came and he tried to explain what happened, the police told him “speak english. Cant you speak english?”
I could understand him. They then located the four fare absconders and despite the camera in the taxi the police told him “well – its four against one”.
Yes we are racist.
Given that Howard, then Rudd and now Gillard as well as Abbott have tried or are currently trying to whistle the same dog; a dog, as I recall, that came most handsomely to Pauline Hanson’s similar whistle, I’m beginning to think that this particular dog, this racist cur, could well be every white Australian’s camp follower.
Indeed casting my mind back I recall “Cocky” Caldwell’s deathless line about “two Wongs” not making a white, and before that Ming’s “White Australia Policy” and Billy Hughes’ “Yellow Peril” and so on and so on back into the earliest days of the colony and the massacres and pox infested blanket gifting of the mutton invasion squattocracy. You’d have to say that historically it doesn’t look good for whitey.
We talk a great game about acceptance and multiculturalism but the truth can be seen in the dominant culture’s treatment of the blackfellas from day one. We’re as bad as apartheid Sth. Africa, except they at least were openly honest about their hatreds, they didn’t wring their hands and whine about the burden, they just shot the “black bastards”, whereas we “intervene” and “set up programs” and “hold enquiries” but the children still die of preventable disease, their cultures and languages, the longest extant cultural traditions on the planet slide ignored for the most part into terminal decline, the young men languish in prisons or on the dole queue, those that don’t die of alcoholism and drug abuse, and the woman are left to hold the lot together and weep for their lost families and the future they’ll never have. All of this at our hands, the dominant white culture.
Little wonder that those communities where they’ve decided to get out from under, where they’re bringing into being a vibrant rebirth, sowing the seeds of a future new aboriginality, a future indigenous way of being, have little time for whitey, indeed most of my blackfella mates, Wiradjuri most of them, have nothing but pity for us. They’re teaching their kids the language and as much of the lore as has survived and they know a kind of solidarity we whitefellas have carelessly thrown away in our rush to dope ourselves up to the eyeballs in consumerist rubbish and false politics all the time believing the lie that “having stuff” will make it all better, when being something, someone, in a community of someones is the only way. And it’s never mattered where that someone came from, what colour they are or what they believe, so long as they’re happy to be here and willing to pitch in.
The rest really is just BULLSHIT! And Julia Gillard’s no better than any of the worst from the past, because sadly, treating refugees like scum just because they’re poor, frightened and arriving in a leaky boat, as opposed to cashed up and arriving in far greater numbers by plane to deliberately overstay their visas, is racism and it does make you a racist; so whatever honeymoon any of you may have felt you could go on with her, to me she’s just another political bitch on the make, so soon revealed as just another naked emperor playing the age old game.
We’ll have to wait and see if the dog will come to the bitch’s whistle or if it will go instead to the master it already knows so well, the mad monk.
I just don’t buy all this “Australians are inherently racist” crap. There’s a pattern here and it’s not hard to work out. The media loves a sensational story as it makes them money, and one of the best is to play on people’s fears, even if the media themselves have to create that fear in the first place (morals don’t enter into it). So they whip up their readers/viewers/listeners into a frenzy and after a bit, politicians, who rely on voter support to stay in power, begin making policy based on “what the people want” – only it was never from the people in the first place, it was from the money-from-lies press. Lack of any fair and balanced press keeps people ignorant on the issue. Politicians don’t care if it’s true or not, just as long as they can stay on top of the pile. And the media will keep feeding it as long as it makes them cash.
In the case of boat people, if the government had a fair policy, say massively speeding up the processing of boat arrivals to avoid placing them in camps for years at a time, the media would look elsewhere for a fear-mongering story, most Australians would go about their lives happily and blissfully ignorant of migration issues, and all this media hype that Australians are a bunch of bigoted racists would dry up.
Sad how just as people as so easily manipulated to believe in the evil, queue-jumping migrant menace, so too are people willing to believe the majority of Australians are frothing at the mouth, apartheid-style racists. I look forward to the day we can see some balanced and fair debate on this issue instead of emotional ranting.
Yeah agree totally, Howard also has never played any sport at even a high level(think state level) let alone the elite level of international cricketers, and that might just be why these countries are not willing to even consider him, he may just lack real physical experience of the hardship of playing abroad and the knowledge of the intimate game that is required to make the kinds of decisions needed, aside from management.
I think JH is a little out of his league for this job, and my personal opinion is that he’s too old as well.
I then said “O so you will be voting for abbott then”
‘O my goodness no no woman would vote for him well not many’ she said.
So there you go it may not really a vote winner for abbott and his offsiders
Were you awake when you wrote that Emmjay? The question of whether racism is IN OUR DNA? Come on. The question is deserving of nothing less than total contempt.
Racism is endemic in India and in its media, which is why they interpret events in Australia through a racist prism. Dileep Premachandran gives some insight into the Indian press in a good quality articel on the ABC Unleashed web site http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/stories/s2816745.htm.
He’s also a cricket lover and professional follower, so his opinion on the JH nomination has some weight. http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/stories/s2919831.htm
No, we aren’t racist Alice. Unless we are also murderers, rapists, thieves, and lawyers. Yes, there are people amongst us who are at least one or more of those things.
It’s not in the DNA. It’s in the culture.
If we are not racist why does the boat people media scourge replay time and time again whipping people up time and time again..
If we were not racist – no-one would care about a few boats of refugees – especially when far far more refugee or illegal immigrants come through the airport. Why isnt the noise about airport entry??
No – its their race at the heart of the refugee debate..because its usually obvious in photos and it plays on our xenophobia…and if we were not racist it wouldnt get a regular media airing.
Im with you on that Mirriyula
“so whatever honeymoon any of you may have felt you could go on with her, to me she’s just another political bitch on the make, so soon revealed as just another naked emperor playing the age old game.”
You bet – playing the boat people just disgusted me. Im turned off. The red head wont get my vote…for being a political bitch on the make…the mad monk certainly wont for sheer idiocy.
Ill vote the only honest party I see at the moment. Ill be voting to bust the senate so neither of the two parties can get a majority.
Well Alice, race doesn’t become any less obvious in photos taken at the airport!
You’ve got to be kidding about the media. They’ll regularly air anything controversial. Drag racing. Climate change. Masterchef.
Look, I’m not trying to pretend there is no racism. But not, in my opinion, anything like the way you think.
In our wonderfully multicultural society most white Australians – and lets face it, when folks say Australians are racist, they’re saying white Australians are racist – happily live side-by-side with people of other nationalities and races. But you’re right Alice, the media is able to stir up public opinion when it comes to boat people. How much of that is racism and how much is anger at what seems to many to be the unfairness of queue jumping? We like a fair go in Australia and nobody likes a cheater. There’s more to it than just a black and white blanket statement that we’re racist bastards. I don’t see crowds of white Australians protesting at Australia Day nationalisation ceremonies crying out for the migrants to go home. Most people, I believe, feel a surge of pride when they see all those migrants becoming Australians. Don’t fall for the crap that the media spruiks, dig a bit deeper if you want to find the truth.
International sport is an extension of international diplomacy. It is noteworthy that Indian corporations are now deeply entrenched in exploration and mining on the African continent. India is simply playing the angles on this issue to garner support from African nations on a quid pro quo basis. Much like Japan making grants to Pacific Islands to garner support for whaling. As long as Australian politicians are content to use sport and art as methods of sanctioning against “rogue” states, politicians like Howard will be used as pawns in international diplomacy. I’m sure Robert Mugabe would feel morally obliged to garner international support against the man who brought in legislation that made it impossible for minority aboriginals to legally claim ownership of their birthright land against the claims of illegal (and immoral) government sanctioned land and mining leases to colonial interests over the past 180 years.
As long as the constitution is framed around the rights of business and governments and ignores HUMAN rights, a predominately white middle class elite will continue to prosper and grow in Australia at the expense of the disposessed ie Aborginals and working class, which in my perspective is nothing less than legalised racism. Corporate and middle class welfare, when held up in contrast to the efforts made by government on welfare and relief for aboriginal welfare pale in comparison.
If you really believe in having an eglitarian society in Oz argue against middle class and corporate welfare and demand a Bill of Rights enshrined in the constitution. Pastoralists and businessman were granted their rights in the constitution one hundred and ten years ago – it was THE reason for Federalism in the first place ie free trade between the colonies.
Concerned about how businesses and government are able to ride roughshod over your “percieved” human rights and believe you shouldn’t have to go to court to have your rights “determined” by a judiciary who are the handmaidan of corrupt political parties?
Argue for a Bill of Human Rights.
When Human Rights are enshrined in the constitution big business and all tiers of government will not be able to introduce legislation that over-rides an individuals human rights. It might also force entities such as corporations to have “equal” responsibilities under the law when there is a conflict between communities/individuals and corporations/governments.
Only when the government and big business is forced to comply with a Constitution that explicitly defines the rights And responsibilities towards our fellow humans, will equal access to all levels of government services be made available to our brothers and sisters in the country and outlying areas of Oz. Similarly when the rights of corporate miners and pastoralists are made equal to the rights (not above) of the original inhabitants of the land, governments will no longer be able to make laws to disposses them of their birthright simply to make money.
Our continuing appeasement of government laws to disenfranchise aboriginal people from their birthright is an extension of entrenched racism in our society. By fighting for a Bill of Rights we extend our hopes for an eglitarian society far beyond the beliefs and practises held in government
and corporate halls of power that Oz is merely a place to do good business.
A Bill of Human Rights that enshrines equality to all under the law would for example, remove the acknowledgment and rights of Monarchy, remove all methods of governments abilities to foster corporate favor to the detriment of detriment of communities and individuals and acknowledges all under the Constitution as having equal rights and that no legal entity has the legal right the right to act or prosper to the detriment of another.
With a constitutionaly enshrined Bill of Human Rights we acknowledge a shared future where we all prosper from the wealth of the country for the people of this land no matter where our roots stem.
m2c
I’ve often thought Australia could do with a Bill of Rights, but to be honest Dooley the US Bill of Rights doesn’t seem to have stopped the US government or big business from walking all over the American people, and certainly doesn’t seem to have helped their indigenous folk much.
Yes there’s no getting away from the US BoR being used to ask that question, however the US constitution was never framed to deal with this century’s legal constructs like “the corporation” or “the sharemarket”, or more to the point the voraciousness of the immoral unethical activities of those legalized entities.
The reason is simply a matter of timing sequence in history. The constitution came first (1787) – big business then looked for a way to have legal rights and representation before the courts – (1819).
The very idea of “the corporation” having rights and privileges accorded by a finding in law through the courts provides sufficient tension so that while the “corporate entity” in the US has recognised legal ruling to exist it could never usurp the invioable rights of the citizen.
It’s quite often what underpins a US citizens or communities ability to sue for redress when a business acts to make a profit and a claiment is subsequently damaged by that action to carry out the business activity. Here in Oz it’s almost the diametric opposite where The Corporations Act is part of the Oz constitution and our human rights are set by legal rulings. And so in effect here in Oz, we have a fundamental situation where citizens and their human rights, are a construct of law (acts of parliment that can and are changed according to the whims of the sitting parliment) and Corporations are afforded the protection of the Constitution.
I believe, had the progenitors of the US constitution and the consequential BoR, had an inkling over how a non-human legalised concept, could be accorded under law, rights that impinge on the welfare and peace of humans, they certainly would have been quite explicit in stating that, along with human rights not being extingushed by the travails and wishes of an elected government they also would have included legalised entities such as “the corporate body” being subjugated to the explicit BoR. Or perhaps providing some form of direct control by the government of the corporate body without having a direct financial stake in the legal entity.
It is hard to argue that corporations don’t act like a State within a State – often usurping the role of an elected government – sometimes even financially supporting and profiting in times of conflict and war with an external enemy.
I’d also like to express that I believe that business, be it big or small is a neccessary function of a society as large as we have. They can do immense good. However if they are to function in that manner, then they need to be accorded the same ethical and moral legal responsibilties and brought to heel under the same political pressure as governments do, through some governing function that is outside the markets direct sphere of influence. For example, ASIC presently only investgates corporate bodies for financial and economic regulatory benefits that act in the best interests of Oz. Perhaps then it might be wortwhile to consider having a similar body look at the social and environmental benefits of how a corprate body acts and determines whether or not it’s Rights and Responsibilities are being lived up to.
Anyhow, while it might be cathartic for me to rant about this issue, it is of no value unless we stop percieving our country as Brand Australia and wake up to the fact that this country is still up for ethical grabs, and until we stop looking at our great nation merely as a means to provide income then our mission to carve out a place where generational dreams can bear fruit is doomed to the same fate as the international markets – repeated failure and setbacks on the back of influence outside of our own governments control.
If we Australians stop and look at what at times seems like fanatical nationalism of the US citizens and wonder why they act so ferverntly, and are willing to place themselves in harms way for their country and to sacrifice their lives and livelihoods, then you only have to understand that the rights they have, their country is willing to stand and fight for and to legally uphold – not sacrifice from term to term to protect the interests business or political parties…….
In contrast our colonial past and the nationalistic ceremonies we engage in – such as Remembrance day – invinces in us a relationship with a monarchy and our devotion to protection of the realm and the monarchy. A far cry from what the US citizen engages in, protects and enjoys.
A thought – if you’re the sort of person that can uphold the privilege held by a reigning monarchy (whatever the race) then you’re also the sort of person who is more than likely capable of asserting your superiority over another race…… because thats what a monarchy stands for – superiority of race, there IS no other basis for a monarchy.
Brand Australia at the moment is a mixed message of oppurtunism and fairplay – essentially what MSM would have us believe how corporations act – a mirror image of the basis of Enterprise Australia. Nothing in the messages I recieve on a daily basis through MSM exhorts me to claim fraternity with my fellow citizen, aside from sport. And don’t they love to underpin that message….
Big business has definately corrupted and shanghaied the American democracy to it’s own ends and the American public is fast approaching an end point that will expose the underbelly of anational corporations when they exit stage right leaving “the land of the brave and free” to setup shop in asia because they can make a better dollar over there. Similar to what has occurred here in Oz over the last 30 years with the removal of trade barriers and tariffs in the manufacturing industry.
errrm, I could go on but I know I’ve probabley said to much and on the other hand not enough so I’ll stop for the mo’
eor
Catherine – if we werent inherently racist we wouldnt have so many “detention centres”. New Zealnd doesnt. They are allowed to work in the community. It makes sense to me. Why not have them learning skills and contributing. If we are not racist why does the “man of middle eastern appearance” get a regular run in the media. Why did we confine and constrain aboriginies for hundreds of years?
We are racist. We are inherently racist. I dont think we can ignore the historical evidence either. We cant ignore the use of words like wogs, dagoes, lebs and chinks etc that have entered our vocabularly even in history. Australians created those insulting terms. You can deny that it is racism (and lots of Australians as individuals are not racist) but we have an ugly underbelly we cannot ignore.
I have no idea whom the ‘we’ group is you are referring to Alice but your observations don’t reflect what I have witnessed in my ‘we’ social groups this last fifty years.
‘We’ were UK imports seeking asylum in a way from what Britain was becoming and to seek some respite from the lordly class system. As irony did have it the Greeks and Italians would come after us were treated as federals by some of my own kind. ‘We’ don’t think like that any more.
By the time the Asian arrivals began it was no big deal. Howard and his terror terror campaign was not a citizens movement so when you say ‘we’ Alice be more clear whom you are referring because your ‘we’ is no one I know.