Tampa 2?
As LP have been pointing out, this is Tampa-time all over again: once again the government do something utterly appalling, in clear violation of international human rights norms, but which nonetheless appeals to the racist-colonial settler mentality of Australian public opinion (sure other stoushers will object vociferously to this description – I suppose I should add the caveat that people do only have such horrendous opinions because these opinions are given the nod by state and media, and also that I am as much a white settler as anyone else).
There’s not much being reported in the way of an ALP response, but it seems that Rudd is tailing the government as closely as possible, in an apparent attempt not to derail the electoral momentum. This is perhaps the only thing more disturbing than the government’s new policy is that it’s not being opposed by the opposition. Indeed, the Courier-Mail reports that Rudd is urging state governments to implement the same measures (the Territory not being a state, the federal government is uniquely able to enforce its will on Aborigines there).
I don’t see any reason why Rudd’s strategy can’t hold here where Beazley’s failed over the Tampa, for the rather simple reason that Rudd is Rudd and Beazley was Beazley. But really, what price victory comrades?
Myth wrote:
“people do only have such horrendous opinions because these opinions are given the nod by state and media”
Yeah that damn free speech can be a problem for our self ordained righteousness.
“appeals to the racist-colonial settler mentality of Australian public opinion”
I am not sure on this one. I think that the measures will only have any political impact on those that are actually concerned by the plight of the aborigines(i.e. the ABC and SBS audience demography), the aborigines and rural residents that have direct contact with the aborigines. I dont think it will have anywhere near the same scope that immigration provokes in every major town in Australia. As for the description “racist-colonial settler mentality of Australian public opinion”, I believe the politically correct term is “pioneering mindset of Australia” and I am not sure how far that actually spreads. I think this is a case of the gradual policy by John Howard to erode labor support at the ballot box and clearly define the issues on which the public is aware of the polarisation between the two parties, which is perhaps the privellidge of incumbency in a democracy.
“But really, what price victory comrades?”
After victory, one gets to rewrite the rules. I doubt aborigines will be an issue at the next federal election, so the winner of this election can basically say one thing and than do another once they are elected. I mean, did Howard ever campaign on the IR reforms? No, he campaigned on his ability to look after the economy.
Mark wrote:
Look, I buy into the position in whiteness studies that says that there is an inherent settler mentality in white Australians and Americans. That said, I haven’t thought about it that much, so I’m somewhat hesitant about it.
I agree that indigenous issues are not high on the metropolitan agenda, especially the issues of remote communities. Hence the claim that what Howard’s trying to do here is wedge against Labor. Howard doesn’t care about Aborigines.
Free speech? The media exemplifies free speech how? State non-intervention in the media is freedom for capital and elites to broadcast their message to the populace, which is not freedom of speech.
arleeshar wrote:
I think an excellent example of the white/settler mentality still central to the (white)Australian psyche is the concept of the “little aussie battler”. This is a frontier identity - what is the battler battling? Originally, the land - the foreign and unyielding Australian conditions, the unpredictable weather cycle. Farmers and dudes in stubbies in remote mines are the quintessential Aussie Battlers, despite both of them having potentially huge incomes.
Interestingly, the proposed new regime could probably never have been okayed by the commonwealth government lawyers without the much-feted referendum of 1967 whose 40th anniversary we just celebrated, that gave the Commonwealth the right to legislate for our indigenous population.
ononotagain wrote:
HOWARD is a snivelling little weasel scrambling to retain power. I’m hoping this latest fiasco seals his fate as an EX prime minister. The little Aussie Battler can be found at thebatttler dot blogspot.
Post new comment