"Dr Nelson said he personally had a "bit of concern about the idea of one generation being responsible" for the past." http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/opposition-slams-planned-apology/2008/01/28/1201369037426.html
This pretty much says it all about Dr Nelson! Funny that the Liberal Party has had no trouble taking credit for our ancestors 'good' deeds. John Howard waxed lyrical about the 'diggers' spirit, for example, intimating that it formed the Australian character, along with the 'fair go', which has been largely mythical but, nonetheless, grew out of the past. There are many examples of the Liberals playing these games, so Dr Nelson is continuing the 'tradition' of all credit and no blame that was so much a feature of John Howard's tenure (see previous article "Is John Howard actually God?", 12 November 07).
Tony Abbott (a truly 'painful' man) has run true to form with his comment, reported in the same Age article, that an apology would reinforce the 'victim mentality'. Please! What reinforces the sense of being victimised is being victimised. Can the Liberal Party find no portfolio where this man doesn't get the chance to demonstrate his lack of humanity?
Dr Nelson also reportedly said: "You have to ask yourself … whether that is the most important issue that's facing Australia when we've seen a decline in the share market, home interest rates go up, petrol get more expensive and a basket full of groceries harder to fill".
Many things come to mind about this comment but I confine myself to two. First, are we capable of paying attention to only one thing at a time? How does a government run if that's the case because our world is obviously more complex than that. Secondly, Dr Nelson demonstrates Liberal priorities yet again (and a lamentable habit of assuming we all think the same way he does and of pushing people's 'fear/selfish' buttons) with all the important issues being about money and none about the quality of our society.
Did being thrown out of government teach them nothing about the values Australians want their leaders to foster?
Tuesday, 29 January 2008
Saturday, 26 January 2008
Australia/Invasion Day
Today I find myself in the 'place of mind' that I come to every year on 26 January. There are always mixed feelings in 'celebrating' our nation's 'feast day'. We celebrate with every imaginable party trick too, so it's no small thing, this day we stop to ponder what it is to be Australian.
First, I always feel an overwhelming sadness and regret that we, of European heritage, ever came here at all. The displacement - holocaust - of the indigenous people weighs heavily on the mind and conscience to the present time and will do so with increasing intensity until we start to reverse the damage. Increasing intensity because we should know better now. The original invaders had the excuse - if one could call it that - of some ignorance due to an arrogant 'world view' about the value of the 'western' culture they were bringing to the lands they colonised. The other major element of invasion/colonisation, greed, remains a motivation for our failure to take full responsibility and genuinely address the harm done - from which we all benefit to this day - in that original act.
I am strangely relieved at the revision of Cook's history in a recently shown ABC program. He was depicted as a much more humane man than I had heard of before, who actually respected the aboriginal people and was not responsible for the abomination of 'terra nullis' (empty land). Also, it was good to see that his later behaviours were interpreted as aberrant in context with his earlier attitudes and practices, viewed as indicative, possibly, of some mental health problem. For the first time I can see our 'discoverer' as someone of 'character'. This doesn't change the horror of what followed but does, in some strange way, get him 'onside' with the protests against them. In my view, he can now be cited as an opponent to atrocity, rather than just an harbinger of oppression.
Secondly, I am overwhelmed by a sense of wonder and tearful love for this country. Not its government, or its wealth, or its suburbs or any of the other meaningless elements. Rather for itself. This amazing island continent, still expressing itself so grandly, so spectacularly, in the life of our planet. Its geography is stunning (although not always 'liveable'). My emotion, as I muse on what it is to be Australian, almost overwhelms me in contemplation of the grandeur and wonder of the landscape. I'm a city girl, how can this 'country' be so embedded in my psyche that it moves me to tears? I don't really care! I'm just overjoyed that it does. Now if we could only stop digging it up and chopping it down!
Thirdly, I feel a fantastic sense of opportunity each year, as this day rolls around, so close to the beginning of a New Year. It is placed in a 'calendar' time of renewal, of potential for change, of thoughtful assessment of the past and contemplation of the future as we'd like it to be. As a nation, we can take this opportunity to change direction, to 'swear off' behaviours that have not served us well and replace them with ones that make us better. We are, at this point in time, where we are! We can't change what has happened before but we can stop the effects from continuing under our 'watch'.
Australia's history is actually very short in terms of nationhood. We can still get on to a path of genuine reconciliation. We can still mould ourselves into a country with the values we've 'spouted' almost since inception. A fair go, an example of a just society for the rest of the world, a safe haven for those from other places, seeking to rebuild their shattered lives in a new land, an advocate for change in the wider world. All these values - and so much more - are our possible future. Why would we not choose such a future?
First, I always feel an overwhelming sadness and regret that we, of European heritage, ever came here at all. The displacement - holocaust - of the indigenous people weighs heavily on the mind and conscience to the present time and will do so with increasing intensity until we start to reverse the damage. Increasing intensity because we should know better now. The original invaders had the excuse - if one could call it that - of some ignorance due to an arrogant 'world view' about the value of the 'western' culture they were bringing to the lands they colonised. The other major element of invasion/colonisation, greed, remains a motivation for our failure to take full responsibility and genuinely address the harm done - from which we all benefit to this day - in that original act.
I am strangely relieved at the revision of Cook's history in a recently shown ABC program. He was depicted as a much more humane man than I had heard of before, who actually respected the aboriginal people and was not responsible for the abomination of 'terra nullis' (empty land). Also, it was good to see that his later behaviours were interpreted as aberrant in context with his earlier attitudes and practices, viewed as indicative, possibly, of some mental health problem. For the first time I can see our 'discoverer' as someone of 'character'. This doesn't change the horror of what followed but does, in some strange way, get him 'onside' with the protests against them. In my view, he can now be cited as an opponent to atrocity, rather than just an harbinger of oppression.
Secondly, I am overwhelmed by a sense of wonder and tearful love for this country. Not its government, or its wealth, or its suburbs or any of the other meaningless elements. Rather for itself. This amazing island continent, still expressing itself so grandly, so spectacularly, in the life of our planet. Its geography is stunning (although not always 'liveable'). My emotion, as I muse on what it is to be Australian, almost overwhelms me in contemplation of the grandeur and wonder of the landscape. I'm a city girl, how can this 'country' be so embedded in my psyche that it moves me to tears? I don't really care! I'm just overjoyed that it does. Now if we could only stop digging it up and chopping it down!
Thirdly, I feel a fantastic sense of opportunity each year, as this day rolls around, so close to the beginning of a New Year. It is placed in a 'calendar' time of renewal, of potential for change, of thoughtful assessment of the past and contemplation of the future as we'd like it to be. As a nation, we can take this opportunity to change direction, to 'swear off' behaviours that have not served us well and replace them with ones that make us better. We are, at this point in time, where we are! We can't change what has happened before but we can stop the effects from continuing under our 'watch'.
Australia's history is actually very short in terms of nationhood. We can still get on to a path of genuine reconciliation. We can still mould ourselves into a country with the values we've 'spouted' almost since inception. A fair go, an example of a just society for the rest of the world, a safe haven for those from other places, seeking to rebuild their shattered lives in a new land, an advocate for change in the wider world. All these values - and so much more - are our possible future. Why would we not choose such a future?
Wednesday, 28 November 2007
Is tolerance about to enter the cultural arena?
The voting public is a big animal so it takes a while to turn but, when it does, it sweeps everything before it. John Howard won his elections largely on the back of lies. The Labor economic 'black hole', that he was the one to keep us safe from terrorism after 911 and Bali, that wretched asylum seekers were 'baby killers' who would throw their own children in the sea. These are just the 'red letter' lies; he's told so many others it's impossible to document them - perhaps someone will do a book of them for us.
Howard and his so called Liberals have undermined the hard won multiculturalism of Australia. I know many people are uncomfortable with Muslim migrants, however, they've been uncomfortable with most migration that wasn't people 'like us' always. It's human nature to see those who are not like us as a potential threat. The government's job is to soothe those fears and help people understand that they needn't worry, not to whip them up into a frenzy and build the fear out of proportion.
Those who remember post-war migration could tell you that many thought bringing in Europeans, who spoke a foreign language and had different cultures, would displace the Australian culture. Well, they didn't destroy it, they expanded and enriched it while becoming Ozified themselves. When the Vietnamese started arriving in boats, we had a government that reassured the people. Yes, there was still fear and racism but we didn't change our immigration laws to target these people. We didn't make it impossible for them to live by so restricting their access to welfare that they couldn't feed themselves. We helped them reunite with their loved ones so they would make Australia their true home. And they didn't overwhelm us or make us unsafe.
African migrants will expand our culture too. If we give them the chance, they will become as Australian as those who came before them. They're not more inclined to violence and crime than the rest of the population. It's just another lie. They will adapt their own cultural habits to their new social environment over time, keeping what's important to them and moulding themselves into Australians over the generations, usually making huge moves by the time the first generation born here is grown. We'll absorb elements of their culture that suit our way of life and, hopefully, be tolerant of those things that don't.
Religious based intolerance is not new to Australia; we had our anti-Catholic backlash years ago. I grew up to the taunt "Catholic dogs leap like frogs in and out the water". Who knew what it meant? The heat was out of the argument by then, so mindless jingles were just that. I still live in a country that doesn't recognise my religious views as I'd like - and believe they should. I'm an athiest and have to put up with all sorts of religious effects on my life. They're made more tolerable by the religious public holidays, as I look at the Queen's birthday holiday as payback for putting up with the monarchy. Perhaps we could incorporate some Jewish and Muslim holidays into our calendar. I'm sure additional public holidays would help us be more tolerant.
God knows (excuse the expression) what will make us more loving towards our 1st Australians! Tolerance is obviously beyond many of the God-fearing.
Howard and his so called Liberals have undermined the hard won multiculturalism of Australia. I know many people are uncomfortable with Muslim migrants, however, they've been uncomfortable with most migration that wasn't people 'like us' always. It's human nature to see those who are not like us as a potential threat. The government's job is to soothe those fears and help people understand that they needn't worry, not to whip them up into a frenzy and build the fear out of proportion.
Those who remember post-war migration could tell you that many thought bringing in Europeans, who spoke a foreign language and had different cultures, would displace the Australian culture. Well, they didn't destroy it, they expanded and enriched it while becoming Ozified themselves. When the Vietnamese started arriving in boats, we had a government that reassured the people. Yes, there was still fear and racism but we didn't change our immigration laws to target these people. We didn't make it impossible for them to live by so restricting their access to welfare that they couldn't feed themselves. We helped them reunite with their loved ones so they would make Australia their true home. And they didn't overwhelm us or make us unsafe.
African migrants will expand our culture too. If we give them the chance, they will become as Australian as those who came before them. They're not more inclined to violence and crime than the rest of the population. It's just another lie. They will adapt their own cultural habits to their new social environment over time, keeping what's important to them and moulding themselves into Australians over the generations, usually making huge moves by the time the first generation born here is grown. We'll absorb elements of their culture that suit our way of life and, hopefully, be tolerant of those things that don't.
Religious based intolerance is not new to Australia; we had our anti-Catholic backlash years ago. I grew up to the taunt "Catholic dogs leap like frogs in and out the water". Who knew what it meant? The heat was out of the argument by then, so mindless jingles were just that. I still live in a country that doesn't recognise my religious views as I'd like - and believe they should. I'm an athiest and have to put up with all sorts of religious effects on my life. They're made more tolerable by the religious public holidays, as I look at the Queen's birthday holiday as payback for putting up with the monarchy. Perhaps we could incorporate some Jewish and Muslim holidays into our calendar. I'm sure additional public holidays would help us be more tolerant.
God knows (excuse the expression) what will make us more loving towards our 1st Australians! Tolerance is obviously beyond many of the God-fearing.
Monday, 12 November 2007
Is John Howard actually God?
I have to ask the question because he's showing many of the characteristics of the God we hear about. This came to my mind with the debacle about interest rates and 'sorry' but 'not sorry'. I do understand the distinction he's trying to make and would find it acceptable, except for his whole thing about being responsible for the rates going down - and thus being the proper person to manage the economy - but not to blame when they go up - and thus being the proper person to manage the economy; this is a little mysterious, to say the least.
It calls to mind how we're always told that God is responsible for the good that happens to us - thus gets the credit - but not the bad - thus escapes the blame. Maybe we're just not being good enough, or praying hard enough? Maybe our faith is being tested? Another phrase comes to mind: God works in mysterious ways, his wonders to perform.
I, of course, am an atheist, so it all slides by me... except for the bloody irritation.
It calls to mind how we're always told that God is responsible for the good that happens to us - thus gets the credit - but not the bad - thus escapes the blame. Maybe we're just not being good enough, or praying hard enough? Maybe our faith is being tested? Another phrase comes to mind: God works in mysterious ways, his wonders to perform.
I, of course, am an atheist, so it all slides by me... except for the bloody irritation.
Sunday, 28 October 2007
Call out the thought police!
Mr Hocking has exposed us. He's uncovered our plot. Now everyone knows that Australian people are writing letters to newspapers, criticising the government. Now everyone knows that there is a campaign against the Workchoices Legislation. Even worse, that campaign is being organised by UNIONS! Oh horror! Who would have guessed it? Unions are organising people to fight for their rights in the workplace. Stop the presses (literally?).
There's a lot that could be said about this man but it's all so obvious, why bother? Suffice to say, he's an idiot.
There's a lot that could be said about this man but it's all so obvious, why bother? Suffice to say, he's an idiot.
Friday, 19 October 2007
Big bad wolf
What are we afraid of? Apparently, according to the Howard Government, we're more afraid of the Unions than we are of this Government. What on earth can this mean? Howard believes it means that he can win this election by running a scare campaign on how many of the Labor Party are previous union officials. This from a Government that introduced the most anti-worker legislation we've seen in my 59 years!
A Labor Government, led by a former leader of the ACTU - Bob Hawke - gave us compulsory superannuation, so that we'd be able to do things like pay off our mortgages and other debts on retirement, perhaps have a supplement to our pension or even not be dependent on the Government for a pension, afford to follow recreational pursuits, etc. This fantastic social policy has been a fundamental change in the lives of working people. Certainly Howard has liked it enough to try to put his own stamp on it by claiming to make the biggest changes in super ever (another of his 'sleight of tongue' exercises). He has, of course, brought in some positive changes (tax rules for over-60s) but he's also opened it up to commercial providers, who do not match the Industry funds' performances and left many, if they choose those providers, vulnerable to the sharks.
The Hawke/Keating Government also gave us privatisation - a personal bugbear of mine - selling off the Commonwealth Bank, for example. Howard has taken and run with this one. If it's not nailed down, he'll sell it, with no regard to the public good. Much of what used to be our national inheritance - Telstra being the highest profile sell-off - now belongs largely to SOME of us instead of ALL of us.
Hawke/Keating gave us Enterprise Bargaining - not a favourite of mine - where, instead of industry wide bargaining, we bargain in our individual workplaces, through the relevant unions if we have any concept of the real world at all. Howard gave us Workchoices, where we bargain alone against management in a modern gladiator sport for survival, where we have virtually no weapons and our opponent has them all PLUS is the favoured of Nero.
Can Howard sell the Unions as THE BIG BAD WOLF successfully, when they are actually 'the woodsman' come to save us? Is he that good, even when we can look back at a stream of his scare-tactic lies, for which we've fallen time and again? You're really good if you can sell people a bill of goods, even when they know you're a liar. Where even the language can be usurped and made to mean the opposite ("decent" comes to mind as an example - don't start me on that one - and "fair go" - nor on that one).
Ultimately, the decision belongs to the people. Howard and his crew can bribe with tax cuts and scare with lies but we know he's doing it and that he has more anti-worker plans in reserve for his next term (should he win one). If we fall for this again, it says more about us than it does about the Government. Those of us who aren't scared of shadows - we know who is really scary - will be stuck with the Australia the mindlessly fearful create for us.
A Labor Government, led by a former leader of the ACTU - Bob Hawke - gave us compulsory superannuation, so that we'd be able to do things like pay off our mortgages and other debts on retirement, perhaps have a supplement to our pension or even not be dependent on the Government for a pension, afford to follow recreational pursuits, etc. This fantastic social policy has been a fundamental change in the lives of working people. Certainly Howard has liked it enough to try to put his own stamp on it by claiming to make the biggest changes in super ever (another of his 'sleight of tongue' exercises). He has, of course, brought in some positive changes (tax rules for over-60s) but he's also opened it up to commercial providers, who do not match the Industry funds' performances and left many, if they choose those providers, vulnerable to the sharks.
The Hawke/Keating Government also gave us privatisation - a personal bugbear of mine - selling off the Commonwealth Bank, for example. Howard has taken and run with this one. If it's not nailed down, he'll sell it, with no regard to the public good. Much of what used to be our national inheritance - Telstra being the highest profile sell-off - now belongs largely to SOME of us instead of ALL of us.
Hawke/Keating gave us Enterprise Bargaining - not a favourite of mine - where, instead of industry wide bargaining, we bargain in our individual workplaces, through the relevant unions if we have any concept of the real world at all. Howard gave us Workchoices, where we bargain alone against management in a modern gladiator sport for survival, where we have virtually no weapons and our opponent has them all PLUS is the favoured of Nero.
Can Howard sell the Unions as THE BIG BAD WOLF successfully, when they are actually 'the woodsman' come to save us? Is he that good, even when we can look back at a stream of his scare-tactic lies, for which we've fallen time and again? You're really good if you can sell people a bill of goods, even when they know you're a liar. Where even the language can be usurped and made to mean the opposite ("decent" comes to mind as an example - don't start me on that one - and "fair go" - nor on that one).
Ultimately, the decision belongs to the people. Howard and his crew can bribe with tax cuts and scare with lies but we know he's doing it and that he has more anti-worker plans in reserve for his next term (should he win one). If we fall for this again, it says more about us than it does about the Government. Those of us who aren't scared of shadows - we know who is really scary - will be stuck with the Australia the mindlessly fearful create for us.
Tuesday, 16 October 2007
New Toys
Well, I've got my new computer, a Dell laptop (Inspiron 1720). It's very pretty and contains heaps of things I don't understand, so it must be good, right? Among other things, I received a 'free' "BT Travel Mouse. I set aside my 'natural' aversion to wireless 'anything' (after all, it was free!) and decided to go with it.
The instructions are so minute that I had to get the generous eyes of Anna to come and read them and install the thing, then, of course, it didn't work, so she had to 'troubleshoot' to get it going, which the little genius accomplished. Unfortunately, it only worked for that session and about 10 minutes after I booted up this morning. Despite my following their 'self-help' torture trail (after doing the obvious button pushing) it wouldn't work. Angel Anna came down and attempted to solve the problem but no luck. I've taken the mouse (USB) off my other computer where all the things I want to access are (rendering it virtually useless unless I want to keep switching the mouse back and forth until I get them all set up on the new one - and how am I going to do that?).
I've asked Dell for help through their online contact option and have received the traditional automatic response. You know the one where they give you options for solving a completely different problem from the one you're experiencing and suggesting that you contact them with all the same details/information again if this 'piece of shit' answer doesn't solve your problem.
I have to ask: has anyone EVER had one of these auto responses address their problem, let alone solve it? Remind me again: why do we love computer technology so much?
The instructions are so minute that I had to get the generous eyes of Anna to come and read them and install the thing, then, of course, it didn't work, so she had to 'troubleshoot' to get it going, which the little genius accomplished. Unfortunately, it only worked for that session and about 10 minutes after I booted up this morning. Despite my following their 'self-help' torture trail (after doing the obvious button pushing) it wouldn't work. Angel Anna came down and attempted to solve the problem but no luck. I've taken the mouse (USB) off my other computer where all the things I want to access are (rendering it virtually useless unless I want to keep switching the mouse back and forth until I get them all set up on the new one - and how am I going to do that?).
I've asked Dell for help through their online contact option and have received the traditional automatic response. You know the one where they give you options for solving a completely different problem from the one you're experiencing and suggesting that you contact them with all the same details/information again if this 'piece of shit' answer doesn't solve your problem.
I have to ask: has anyone EVER had one of these auto responses address their problem, let alone solve it? Remind me again: why do we love computer technology so much?
Sunday, 14 October 2007
Happy little Vegemites.. as bright as bright can be...
I'm no expert on prisons but it is fascinating to think that prisoners, who have no 'right to privacy', are able to refine Vegemite (and numerous other foodstuffs) into alcohol. Such a problem apparently, that they are now to be deprived of this spread. I personally object to the fact that those who DON'T sacrifice their toast and Vegemite for a swig, are now going to suffer with those who'd prefer to get legless (why would you want to drink in prison, I wonder?).
I've got an idea (picture lightbulb)! Why not consider supervising prisoners to prevent this 'secret' activity? The authorities might just be able to use this same revolutionary idea to monitor other behaviors, such as bashings, rapes and other harms to these incarcerated people, for whose safety we have a responsibility. After all, we put them in prisons (acknowledging that the crimes committed were their actions - if the guilty verdicts were correct - and leaving aside the societal ills that may have led them to these crimes) where they are unable to leave, or control their environment, so shouldn't we make sure they're not punished beyond the letter of the law for their crimes? Incarceration is the penalty under the law. Perhaps those running the prisons should take a quick peek at the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights - just in case they give a damn.
I've got an idea (picture lightbulb)! Why not consider supervising prisoners to prevent this 'secret' activity? The authorities might just be able to use this same revolutionary idea to monitor other behaviors, such as bashings, rapes and other harms to these incarcerated people, for whose safety we have a responsibility. After all, we put them in prisons (acknowledging that the crimes committed were their actions - if the guilty verdicts were correct - and leaving aside the societal ills that may have led them to these crimes) where they are unable to leave, or control their environment, so shouldn't we make sure they're not punished beyond the letter of the law for their crimes? Incarceration is the penalty under the law. Perhaps those running the prisons should take a quick peek at the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights - just in case they give a damn.
Article 5.
No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.
Friday, 12 October 2007
Howard style reconciliation (Claytons?)
"I sense in the community a rare and unexpected convergence of opinion on this issue between the more conservative approach which I clearly identify with and those who traditionally have favoured more of a group rights approach." (John Howard)
What can we say? On the one hand, Johnny vilifies Africans who must be among the most inoffensive of Australian residents, to pander to the underlying and shameful racism that lurks in the hearts of the fearful, while on the other hand, he talks of a fundamental change of heart about our much maligned and mistreated aboriginal population.
Apart from the obvious inadequacies of his 'change of heart' (miserly recognition after 11 years of racist rhetoric and policy) an interesting part of his statement is that it indicates there must be signs that the community see his attitude towards the aboriginal people as a negative. He would change for no other reason because he just doesn't make progressive change unless there's an election benefit for him (and from the rarity of these 'events', we're not very demanding of moral policies - East Timor belated intervention comes to mind; strugglling to remember others).
It seems his research indicates that, while we are concerned enough for our own 'black' people to at least want the appearance of caring, we are uncaring about those from other places and we find racist statements and policies on them acceptable.
I refer back to my question at the top of this blog: If so many people must be easily led, must they be led by idiots and villains?
What can we say? On the one hand, Johnny vilifies Africans who must be among the most inoffensive of Australian residents, to pander to the underlying and shameful racism that lurks in the hearts of the fearful, while on the other hand, he talks of a fundamental change of heart about our much maligned and mistreated aboriginal population.
Apart from the obvious inadequacies of his 'change of heart' (miserly recognition after 11 years of racist rhetoric and policy) an interesting part of his statement is that it indicates there must be signs that the community see his attitude towards the aboriginal people as a negative. He would change for no other reason because he just doesn't make progressive change unless there's an election benefit for him (and from the rarity of these 'events', we're not very demanding of moral policies - East Timor belated intervention comes to mind; strugglling to remember others).
It seems his research indicates that, while we are concerned enough for our own 'black' people to at least want the appearance of caring, we are uncaring about those from other places and we find racist statements and policies on them acceptable.
I refer back to my question at the top of this blog: If so many people must be easily led, must they be led by idiots and villains?
Thursday, 11 October 2007
Developing points of view...
If so many people must be easily led, must they be led by idiots and villains?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)