Howard’s ‘national emergency’: an outsider’s view
Lucire’s Sylvia Giles has just returned from an assignment in Melbourne, Victoria, and blogged about the state of race relations in Australia. I trust Sylvia’s judgement (otherwise, why would she be writing for us?) and it was very sad to see that even regular Australians from her random sample did not have good things to say about Prime Minister Howard’s record. And I had been quite supportive of the PM and of Alexander Downer, especially when they tried to back up alleged terrorist and al-Qaeda trainee David Hicks (in contrast to the laziness of our own Foreign Minister-outside-Cabinet, Winston Peters). Sadly, Sylvia gives us a lot of food for thought and may provide an answer to the age-old (well, age and a half) question, ‘Where the bloody hell are you?’
Comments
Howard's mob has a lot to answer for especially when it comes to race relations in Australia. He couldn't bring himself to say "Sorry" to a generation of Aboriginal Australians who were abducted in the misguided belief that they had to be assimilated into white society or else...
Earlier in his career, he freed the anti-immigration genie and allowed the consequences to be borne by the likes of the Asian-Australian community. Rednecks saw him justify all this crap. Of course, when Pauline Hanson came along, it was practically a love-fest amongst the rednecks in this country when anyone who was a lesser shade of pale became fair game.
Islamophobia in this country has been stirred silly by Canberra since 9/11. Ask any Muslim in this country if they feel villified.
And just this past week, Howard has mobilised extra police and troops to take over all the indigenous communities in our outback. All this might and force to battle cases of child sexual abuse in those communities. Once more, you have to ask yourself if you were a black Australian: Why am I being picked on?
Howard's one of the cleverest snakes in Australian politics. Nothing sticks to him because he flings mud from his position of power as and when it justifies his political aims.
The UN is aware of the standards inside those refugee detention centres in South Australia, and also Howard's dubious "Pacific Solution" refugee processing centre in Nauru. A deal is reportedly being discussed with Indonesia for them to set up and run a similar off-shore refugee processing facility for Canberra... all this in an effort to stop illegals setting foot on the mainland and therefore being able to claim refugee assistance from Australia immediately. By barring these people from landing on Australian soil anywhere, the idea is that they will have to prove their bona fides (which could take years) and/or deter other would-be refugees.
The problem with these things is that the inocent get caught up in the dragnet. We've had two very high profile cases of innocent folks being falsely detained One was a German-Australian (Cornelia Rau) with a history of mental illness, the other was an Australian citizen of Filipino extraction (Vivian Solon). The latter was deported to the Philippines and was actually living in a hospice there for the terminally ill. She was discovered by a vigilant social worker.
And the then-immigration minister who presided all of the bungles was recently promoted to the cushy position of Ambassador to Italy (Amanda Vanstone).
Amidst all of this crap, almost anyone who's clearly not a WASP coming into this country is viewed through jaundiced lenses, even though they may have legitimate reasons to be here.
This is the reality of Howard's Australia since 9/11 especially. Utter bollocks if you ask me. The complexion of tolerance has changed for the worse in this period.
Third time round, I stayed at a flasher hotel with plenty of Eurotrash and Asians, and didn’t feel as out of place, even if the experience was not as Australian.
I actually have to say, that other than the appalling apathy towards race relations in their country, I LOVED Melbourne. But what I couldn’t understand about Melbourne, (and let me stress I know little of the rest of the country, and have absolutely no travel experience there), is that it IS a very multicultural city, if a little culturally segregated. And yet all its residents still felt so defeatist about the fact it is a racist place. There were a lot of amazing things about the city. And as a fashion and travel writer, it will be getting a glowing review for me. But I cannot pretend my limited investigations didn’t greatly upset me. Which is why I felt it deserved another piece, which might never see the light of publishing day, but summed up my distress. And sometimes, the 50 odd friends you have on your myspace come through for you and read you work! And you feel as though someone might be listening.
1. All Australians are racist.
and
2. There are no racists in their own country.
and
3. That the solution to the problems of those in aboriginal communities will be solved by yelling "racist" at Aussies, and then sipping on your Chardonnay, content in the knowledge that you've told those racist Aussies off, and that is all that needs to be done.
Well it isn't.
It will no doubt come as a surprise to these "instant experts" to be told that the majority of aboriginals, or part aboriginals, are doing just fine, thank you very much. How do I know this? Well, I grew up with many of them, some of whom have been life long friends of mine.. Yes, there are some aboriginals who are still living in the stone age culture, and who have adopted the very worst features of Western culture. i.e. alcoholism and substance abuse. Guess what! My aboriginal friends don't want to know them either. Does that make them racists? Just as I don't want to know whites who are living in the same circumstances. Do you?
Yes, they live in degrading circumstances. And yes, contrary to your prejudice, many attempts have been made to help these people. The Howard government is finally making some attempt to address the appalling circumstances in which these people live. Was it politically motivated? In my opinion, yes. Will it succeed? I don't know. I hope it does. Anything is worth a try. If it doesn't, then I'll know where to come to for advice. After all, you have all the answers here.
Well, don't you?
Snowy, I have no idea who you’re directing your comments at. I also don’t know where all the answers are, and none of the people who commented earlier did. It sounds to me like you are angry for no reason. Sure as heck don’t know where your aggro is coming from.
For the record, if you are directing your words at us: no one here said that all Australians were racist. No one on this page, as far as I can tell, made any of the gross generalizations that you accused us of.
Sylvia Giles’ original post simply was an observation. No prejudging took place. I trust Sylvia. I trust that she did not write a biased post but that she went to a tiny sample of Australians, all of whom were ashamed of their record. This is not Sylvia making that judgement for them. If you had bothered to read further, she even went on to say how much she liked your country.
If you don’t like your reality, change it.
No one here claimed to live in a superior country where they are free from racism—for the record, I have accused New Zealanders of the same right here on this blog and on national television. Incidentally, I believe Ninja is an Australian commenting on his own country.
But you should take from this the following: not everyone thinks the same way you do; and that your country seriously needs to work on not only its internal issues but its external image. If people outside Australia are thinking that your nation is racist, or that their own nations are less racist, then that is a problem, isn’t it?
I do not know if Howard’s plans will succeed. I have a friend in the Northern Territory right now telling me about how dire the situation is in a small town. I do not say that the Liberals do not have a point. But I am not convinced that the programme will work: as a minority, it smacks of the “white man knows best” syndrome. I believe it is scaremongering, bringing to light an issue which should be dealt with, but the timing suggests political motivations without any substance. It is not the first time the Liberal Party has been accused of playing the race card.
I thought blogs were for dialogue. If you’re willing to point out the pros of this amazing plan, rather than attack those who are simply reporting on your fellow countrymen for stating their opinions, then do so. Right now, I haven’t heard, other than from a few radio news reports, why the Liberal plans will work or the situations they are meant to address. You had your chance above, if you didn’t spend it making prejudgements of others and how they supposedly had some superiority complex over Australia.
If you are a defender of the government’s plans, then defend away. It may surprise you, but we are actually prepared to read what you think.
Oh please, Jack. The old "angry with no reason" line has been done to death. Look at the following extracts which led to my response:
and
andand
Well yes, Jack, but its their problem, isn't it. If people outside Australia want to feel superior because of their supposedly more enlightened attitude towards race relations than my country is, then so be it. Just don't take me to task for pointing out their sheer hypocrisy in doing so.
I still can’t see the slightest thing wrong with people expressing a viewpoint. No one here expressed their own national superiority. My own quotes that you pulled out did not even state that Australians were racist. Where did I suggest that we are more enlightened? So people aren’t allowed to be critical, or have a negative sense of Australia?
I stand by my last quotation that you pulled out, too, and I can hardly see any “superiority” there. So I am superior for saying that people hold different opinions to you, or that Australia gives off a negative vibe about its race relations? These are facts, and I certainly didn’t pull them out of thin air. It doesn’t give me pleasure in saying it, nor does it give me a feeling that I am better than you as I sip on my chardonnay.
Nor can I see any hypocrisy when I have already pointed out to you that no non-Australian above felt their countries were perfect. Ninja is inside Australia, and he doesn’t seem too thrilled about your country’s record. Sylvia herself didn’t put words into your countrymen’s mouths—something you have failed to address when you fired off your latest comment. Why did those Australians put themselves down, placing themselves in an inferior position?
And you’re upset because someone simply talked about what some Australians think.
I have clearly stated to you that I have blogged about racist New Zealanders and commented about them in other media. So how am I superior to you, or why is this still a more enlightened position?
It’s not as though this post started off with: hey, let’s put down some dumb Ockers today.
This post began because of observations someone made about what Australians said of their own.
Not what New Zealanders said of Australians.
My first post was intentionally brief, leaving things open-ended so we could hear the other side. Compare it to other posts I’ve made, where I’ve drawn my own conclusions, and you might see that.
Naturally, you choose to ignore any comment that might go against your desire to feel pissed off, maybe because it’s easier to blame your feeling of victimization on all these foreigners out to get you.
I invited you to point out the pros of your position and to debate the issues rather than highlight how others make poor you all upset. You have still failed to do so.
Come on, you think you have some answers to reverse all these supposedly wrongful perceptions about your country. Here is a forum for you to tell them to us.
Maybe tell us that in your experience, Australia is no worse off. Tell us how the people who responded to the surveys in the past were ignorant or swayed by stereotypes. Maybe say that Melbournians are self-deprecating, sensed a foreigner asking a question, and gave an inaccurate impression because of some bandwagon complex. Maybe even say that Sylvia’s sample was too small for it to be representative of Australians.
It’s your country, Snowy.
I think it’s a fair comment to say New Zealanders don’t come up with racism as an issue—so why not say that New Zealanders are more ignorant or are more easily swayed by government propaganda about racial harmony? Point out that in New Zealand, which supposedly has integrated the white and Maori races, still has monolingual banknotes and a Anglo-European Parliamentary system and that it, too, suffers from an overrepresentation of its natives in jails.
OK, sure I’m now doing your work for you, but the point is, I shouldn’t have to if you actually wanted to tell us about why we were all wrong.
Or maybe even tell us why you have this sense that everyone is out to rubbish Australia—I don’t see that anyone had that agenda, but let’s face it, that was your first reaction and you reckoned we did. Maybe the best inquiry is: why is that?
Instead of insisting that everyone is looking down their noses at you because of some inferiority complex, fire off some ammo on why they should not (even though I still firmly believe no one has looked down at you).
I am still keeping an open mind, and in time, people might come to this page and look for both sides of the story.
It may even be more interesting to see how your country’s facts are getting warped by others—or maybe they aren’t.
You’re there. We’re not. So enlighten all these ignorant foreigners.
Although I doubt you would offer me the same courtesy, my invitation to you here remains open.
And in case the above was too difficult for you to follow, here’s why I feel justified in taking you to task in simpler language:
No one said or, from what I know of the writers and myself, believes that.
No one said or believes that.
No one said or believes that.
What prejudice was outlined?
Where did anyone take a position contrary to this?
For what it’s worth, and probably not much to you since I am some dumb non-Australian, I have a white friend who works with Aboriginal communities doing the things that I supposedly am too ignorant to know about.
And that, as far as I can see, are the points of your original argument dealt with.
Next time an Australian tells me I’m superior, I should just accept it and run with it. You’ve provided more than enough evidence.
It may interest you to know that I recently spent a very pleasant month in New Zealand. No complaints whatsoever. Lovely cities, lovely people, lovely scenery. No feelings of differences in culture that you seem to feel exist. Zilch. In fact, I felt I could have been at home in Oz.
I don't really know what the average Kiwi's attitude is towards racism. Quite frankly, I feel that it is none of my business. I imagine that attitudes vary right across the spectrum there, just as they do here, and in every country on this earth. I do know that I would not presume to tell Kiwis how to handle any perceived problems. Nor would I prepared to make the call that my country's culture was superior after a walk down one street in one city.
But that's just me, I guess.
I didn’t disagree with your viewpoint on the issue originally raised because I don’t think you have made one. Maybe your view is, ‘It’s not as bad as you think,’ then I’d love to know why. I said I was open to hearing more.
The only things I got from your postings are, for starters, that your believe that everyone on this page was wrong. I pointed out that no one made or assumed the three points you accused them of making. Then you said we all had the answers. I said we didn’t. That is all this boils down to: your assumptions being pointed out as wrong, and a still unaccepted invitation for you to advance an argument on Australia’s race relations.
If you still want to highlight how your position can be supported, namely of how Howard’s policy or Australia’s race relations are good things (or are being handled as best they can given the reality that we supposedly do not know), I personally still want to hear it.
There’ll be others surfing to this page and they want to see two sides of the story. Right now, there is one side, and one reaction from you without any support.
For the record, I never made any call after one walk down one street. It was merely one example of a feeling I got, which you seem to deny others of having. I also pointed out how this thread started—by Australians’ comments about their own, not by non-Australians’. You seem to miss that point and, from what I can tell with your latest comment, you’ve missed it again. This is not about Sylvia poking her nose in and making a call. This is about Sylvia asking Australians about their own opinion. And I am asking you for yours now.
I am the longest running columnist (10½ years) with one Australian magazine, just as one tiny example of my regular contact with your country. True, while I have not spent a solid month at one go, I have made enough trips across the Tasman that surely total more than that, since 2004.
We still have differences with your third paragraph above. In this connected world, I think we should poke our noses beyond others’ borders. How else would we know that we are up to snuff by international standards? And Australia itself does that with its foreign policy, especially with its increasing role in South Pacific security.
I am interested to hear your viewpoints of Australia. Please defend away, rather than accuse others of looking down their noses. I already gave you some examples of the sort of points I have been asking for, but how about some genuine ones that you have witnessed? The only hint of one from you so far is that there have been programmes to help Aboriginals which supposedly we know nothing about (another erroneous assumption). Please extend on that and how that is the one of the best ways Australia has come to redress the balance with Aboriginal communities, or how this latest programme of John Howard is a good thing, and rebut this negative impression people are getting.
There, I have given you a lead. Will you take this third invitation to submit your reasoning rather than keep stating how others are getting it wrong? Just say why everyone, including your fellow countrymen, are so wrong.
Around 1950, the government of the day decided that the aboriginal school should be closed, and that aboriginal kids should attend the same school as the white kids. And, surprise, surprise, the world didn't end as some white parents supposed. Kids are colour-blind, and before too long, black kids and white kids were playing together after school and weekends. Some of those kids have remained friends of mine to this day, over fifty years later.
Over time, and with the help of the Whitlam government, blacks eventually moved over to houses on the "white" side. Oh yes, there were still some with racist attitudes, mainly from the older whites, but not from those kids who grew up together. So, today black and white are living side-by-side in harmony. And that old aboriginal school is now being put to good use by aboriginals as a showplace for their culture. So, could things have been done better? Of course they could, but we got there eventually. None of us had any experience in integrating stone age tribal and European cultures. But things weren't helped by occasional visits from the metropolitan press looking for a good "racist" story to boost sales. Hence, my absolute distrust of outsiders, and the press in general, who just aren't interested in success stories, and who are only too happy to use the "racist" tag as the reason for the plight of some aboriginals.
But the truth is, that there are still some aboriginals who choose not to integrate. There are some who adopted the worst of the white man's culture, and who spend their lives in an alcoholic haze, not caring for their families or themselves, and doing nothing productive in this society at all. And prey to the dregs of white society as well. And just like some white people who live similar lives, drumming some sense into the heads of these people is a massive problem. Governments and others have tried over the years with little success, even to the extent of removing children from these appalling conditions in an attempt to give them a better life. They were subsequently condemned for their efforts in the "Stolen Generation" report. These aboriginals still living in such appalling circumstances are the ones to whom Howard's policy is directed.
Do I think Howard's policy is politically motivated? Yes. Do I think it will succeed? I don't know, but I can't suggest anything better. Can you?
You are right: we don’t know how the new policy will work. It may, it may not. I’m not going to suggest an alternative because put simply, I don’t know the issues at work. You have helped bring some to light and were the best person on this page (other than Ninja) to make these statements.
You raise some excellent points, and I'm glad to hear them.
Firstly, I don't imagine all Australians are racist. And when our neighbourhood posse meet for dinner this week, here in Newtown, Wellington, the first question that came up was, well, is New Zealand a racist place? Are we too quick to point the finger?
Newtown, Wellington, is the most dynamic part of our city, with a spectrum of ethnicities, all of which are New Zealanders, of course. And, as a side note, I hate to admit it but we were drinking cask wine, where we get about a fancy as 'red or white?'.
Yes of course in New Zealand we too have the gamut of prejudices, spanning too across categories such as ethnicity, religion and sexuality. In fact, all to recently we had a close call where a racist nearly became Prime Minister! How embarrassing… anyway, Don Brash divided the country, and I am ashamed to say rocketed in opinion polls by appealing to the interests of ‘mainstream’ New Zealanders. Which of course does nothing for the underprivileged, minorities, or tangata whenua. All of whom contribute and make up the multi-cultural fabric of our society, despite maybe not making up the numbers.
Which is why, in my opinion, it is a good thing that we have a treaty, which although may have rotted in a safe for over a centaury, still forms a large part of how we address the brief of governing our completely individual country. This is why, in my opinion, it should form a part of our constitution (when we get one!). Because it forms the basis of a union. The values it upholds, and were promised to the indigenous people of our beautiful land, are not subject to public opinion, not subject to the vogue of politics, and cannot be used as political leverage. The public at large often know little about the complexities of poverty, and the role ethnicity may (or may not) play in that. There are people who devote their life to the study of these issues. But while the public may swing from centre left to maybe a centre right, cultural experts should be left in charge. For those who it really matters to, I imagine that makes a huge difference.