Monday 11 October 2021 was "Freedom Day" in Greater Sydney. In our case it's Restriction Day since the new rules actually restrict some freedoms we had Sunday. A newspaper colleague commented: "It's a nightmare trying to keep up with these rules, which keep changing."
That's true. I only realised the impact of the new changes on 6 October and then spent days trying to clarify the rules and their implications for the community activities I was engaged in. After multiple emails and phone conversations plus a rule clarification at the weekend, I think that we have come to a landing point although ambiguities remain. While I think that my involvement was helpful to me and others, it also represented another set of lost days.
A friend commented how hard she had found it to concentrate on her PhD. I have found the same dragging effect on my writing. We both know that it shouldn't matter, we should be able to closet ourselves to focus on our work, but it has. Somehow, telling myself to start writing, to get on with it, doesn't work! Ah well, sad face.
I'm sure that we will do better. There has been some fascinating stuff happening.
‘Many forms of Government have been tried, and will be tried in this world of sin and woe. No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed it has been said that democracy is the worst form of Government except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.…’ Winston S Churchill, 11 November 1947
This hard to read image from Google Ngam shows the use of the term liberal democracies in books from 1860 to the present, You can see can see how little the term was used in the past. There was an acceleration during the Second World War and then usage just jogged along before an exponential acceleration during the 1980s. Usage then stabilised before exploding again in the 2000s.
According to Wikipedia, the term has a long history, but it's also one that I have rarely used. For most of my life I have referred just to democracy with a special focus on parliamentary democracy. Occasionally I have referred to Western democracies, but a search on the blog shows that I have used the term liberal democracies just once in several thousand posts and then in passing.
No doubt this reveals that I am out of touch. I went to Wikipedia to review the term and was surprised somewhat at the analysis. I felt that the term had become an ideological label whose meaning was in fact uncertain and indeed confusing.
I then did the Ngam analysis just to check usage, This suggested that the increased usage of the term has been directly bound up with particular events. I'm not sure where I go with this. I just wanted to record the information.
I have written about the ways in which changing boundaries and administrative structures affect perceptions and rules in often perverse ways. These issues are much on my mind as I sit here in covid regulated Armidale. I could wish that we had our own New England state since this would have given us greater protection and control. We don't, so I want to focus on more localised issues.
Let me start with a Sydney example before becoming totally parochial. As part of its local government restructuring, the Sydney Government merged two councils to form Bayside City Council. The southern council, Botany Bay, was separated by Sydney Airport and had nothing in common with the southern portions of Bayside. Now all of Bayside is counted as a high risk area because of cases in the south that have little to do with the old Botany Bay Council area.
To take a Northern example, when Armidale Regional Council was put into lockdown, Guyra was included in the lockdown while the much closer centre of Uralla was not because it was a different local government area. The changes based on LGA boundaries actually made no sense.
Becoming totally parochial. the everchanging rules applied to Armidale have become confusing and difficult. I am reasonably bright, but I struggle to understand them When I do understand them, I find that I object.
When the first lockdown rules were applied as the virus first spread so long ago, there was a gathering together. Many stores such as garden centres and craft stores remained open, People turned to home activities, to gardening, to house repairs, all things that could be done at home. Local businesses organised special deliveries. In a way, it now seems like a golde4n age.
This time, things are different.,
Stores are shut. It is hard to acquire things whether it be craft, printers ink or furniture, My partner wanted to acquire some wool to knit a scarf. Last time we went into town to get the wool. This time we had to order two balls of wool. They came with a long delay plus a thirteen dollar delivery charge.I need to buy ink, but the normal places are shut.
The rules state that only one person can go shopping.The shared shopping experiences are no longer possible even where people are living in the same household.
The distance rules are confusing, My partner has bought a new house.We need to do new things before we move in. I have checked. It's just within the five k limit from our current place. Can we go there together? I think that we can. The house is vacant. We can treat it as exercise, but the police are stopping people and I don't know.
There are no covid cases within hundreds of k of Armidale. Our risks lie in transmission from elsewhere. And yet we suffer,
The sudden collapse of the Afghanistan Government in the face of the Taliban offensive took me by surprise. I am old enough to remember the fall of Saigon in the face of the North Vietnamese offensive and the chaotic scenes that followed. President Biden's suggestion that Afghanistan could not be compared to that fall was frankly risible.
There was another similarity as well. As South Vietnam was falling, the then Whitlam Government resisted calls calls to bring to Australia those who had supported Australian troops. At the time I was involved with a small group in Canberra seeking to bring people to Australia. My involvement was peripheral, writing to Ian Sinclair whom I had known for many years to seek his support, but I remember the atmosphere very clearly if not all the details. This time the Morrison Government was prepared to take some action, but became so tied up in red tape of its own making that action was too little and too late.
Of all the various events, the evacuation of the Bagram airbase stands out in my mind as a symbol of just went wrong. This base, the main US base in Afghanistan, seems to have been abandoned without any plan or attempt to transfer effective control to the Afghani Government. It added to a picture of a chaotic withdrawal that effectively undercut the authority of a Government already under pressure. That Government's authority had previously been undermined by decisions taken by the Trump administration that effectively treated the Government in Kabul as a cipher. Maybe a total Taliban victory was inevitable, but the actions followed by the US and its allies including Australia accelerated the process, creating chaos.
What will come now? I have no clear answer. The Taliban claims to have changed, although the same religious and ideological elements are still there. Afghanistan itself has changed, especially in the cities. The new Taliban Government still in the process of formation faces some difficult challenges. I suppose my feeling is that pragmatism will temper ideology to some degree.
I think that the biggest problem from a Western perspective is the damage done to the reputation of the West. Many will see it as another symbol of the West's decline. Only time will tell if those views are correct.
Postscript
kvd pointed me to this piece Farewell to Bourgeois Kings. It's an interesting read although it mixes different things together. I have listed it here because I thought that it may interest readers and also may wish to reference it later.
"I don't want an 18-year-old in Queensland dying from a clotting illness who, if they got COVID, probably wouldn't die.
"We have had very few deaths due to COVID-19 in Australia in people under the age of 50 and wouldn't it be terrible that our first 18-year-old in Queensland who dies related to this pandemic, died because of the vaccine.
Queensland's Chief Health Officer Jeannette Young
On 3 July 2021 in Confusions over AstraZeneca I commented on confusions in the Australian vaccination advice and processes. I included this quote from Queensland's Chief Health Officer attacking the PM's suggestion that younger Australians should access AstraZeneca subject to doctor's advice.
Dr Young could not have foreseen the Delta variant, but her emotional reaction helped create an environment where people continue to resist the now widely available AstraZeneca vaccine. This holds even among older Australians where the vaccine is recommended. I know this from my own contact network. It also appears more strongly among culturally and linguistically distinct where clear messaging in language is very important.
Governments, especially the NSW Government, are now trying to encourage people to use AstraZeneca subject to doctor's advice on their personal situation. This actually mirrors advice previously provided. I haven't checked the statistics, but the raw numbers suggest that the number of younger Australians who have been hospitalised or died from covid already exceeds the statistical risks from AstraZeneca side effects. They also show that vaccinated Australians who do become infected are far less likely to suffer severe effects.
Young people are already opting with their feet to get AstraZeneca recognising that vaccination is the only path that will allow them to resume a normal life. Meantime, there is one plus in all this. The AstraZeneca surplus is allowing us to provide more vaccines to out neighbours!
The theme of this year's NAIDOC Week is Heal Country. The NAIDOC web site describes is in this way:
The NAIDOC 2021 theme – Heal Country! – calls for all of us to continue to seek greater protections for our lands, our waters, our sacred sites and our cultural heritage from exploitation, desecration, and destruction.
Country that is more than a place and inherent to our identity.
Country that we speak about like a person, sustaining our lives in every aspect - spiritually, physically, emotionally, socially, and culturally.
NAIDOC 2021 invites the nation to embrace First Nations’ cultural knowledge and understanding of Country as part of Australia's national heritage and equally respect the culture and values of Aboriginal peoples and Torres Strait Islanders as they do the cultures and values of all Australians.
For generations we have been calling for stronger measures to recognise, protect, and maintain all aspects of our culture and heritage.
We are still waiting for those robust protections.
This year’s theme also seeks substantive institutional, structural, and collaborative reform – something generations of our Elders and communities have been advocating, marching and fighting for.
Healing Country means finally resolving many of the outstanding injustices which impact on the lives of our people.
It is about hearing and actioning the aspirations of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples which are the culmination of generations of consultation and discussions among our nations on a range of issues and grievances.
In a way, this description is confusing because it mixes together a number of different things. In this post, I want to concentrate one thing, the sense of Country.
My Country. Julia Griffin Rain on the Uralla Road
I once tried to explain the difference between the Aboriginal perspective and that of the new European settlers in this way: to the Aboriginal peoples, the present was an extension of a living past, to the Europeans, a point towards a still to be defined but hoped for future. The Aboriginal perspective was carried through in various kinship systems that effectively integrated the natural and human environment by placing plant, animal and physical features within kinship systems.
The modern Aboriginal idea of Country and connection to Country draws from this traditional base although it carries connotations that reflect the Aboriginal historical experience, including the desire to re-establish and re-assert links to past connections and experiences destroyed by European colonisation. In a way, the idea of Country and healing Country is part of a set of beliefs linked to but independent of the original history, a set of beliefs that has now gained a living presence, creating its own history.
The Celtic Revival provides an example of a similar process in a European environment. This drew in part from historical grievances, in part from a sense of loss, in part from a romanticized version of the past. In doing so it aimed to recover elements of that past, including language revival. It also incorporated mystical elements drawing from Celtic folklore that have had a huge impact in, among other things, fiction including in fantasy world. The ABC TV series Cleverman (a series I greatly enjoyed) provides an Aboriginal example.
My Country. Gordon Smith Winter Morn
When I first came across the Aboriginal sense of Country, my instinctive reaction was Yes! because it so exactly mirrored my reactions to the area in which I grew up, which remains my Country today. Later, when I worked with Aboriginal people, I came to understand why Country was so important to people whose pasts had been so disrupted. Without that contact they were adrift in a way I sometimes felt faced with the destruction of the immediate past and present, with distance from my home, with my inability to do things that might protect, preserve and create.
Some may argue, and especially those deracinated Australians who have lost connection with place, that the comparisons are not comparable. How can I as an older white male from a middle class background who has gained from the benefits of settler society, from the benefits of dispossession, possibly understand, share? In response, I would argue several things.
From my experience, there is a thirst among many Australians to establish their own place in their family histories, to link back to the places they and their families have come from, to establish connection with the places they now live. Many, and especially older Australians from regional backgrounds who have moved on but now hark back to their past, share and re-share stories and images from places that were, in their thinking, their own Country. I know all this from my experience as a regional historian, from my participation in groups such as Armidale Families Past and Present.
In my own case, my mind is filled with experiences, stories and images that now incorporate the deep history of Aboriginal New England however imperfectly. I am a story teller who has ended in the role as preserver of memories. My mind is full of stories. Those stories are all linked in some way to land, to Country.
To my mind, the Aboriginal concept of Country holds out important possibilities for healing the gap between between Indigenous and non-Indigenous society. In understanding the Aboriginal concept of Country we learn about Aboriginal society and history. We can better support action to heal the past. But we also learn more about our own concepts of Country, about the things that are important to us.
Aboriginal languages, NSW at the time of European Occupation. In 1788 there were at least 250 Aboriginal languages on the Australian continent incorporating multiple dialects.
I see that Neil Whitfield has put up his annual post(s) on NAIDOC Week. The Week celebrations are held across Australia each July to celebrate the history, culture and achievements of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. NAIDOC is celebrated not only in Indigenous communities, but by Australians from all walks of life. This year the Week begins today, 4 July.
I am less familiar with NAIDOC Week than I was when working as a contractor for the Aboriginal Housing Office, NAIDOC Week was a major celebration, Now many years later and miles away, my current activities have caused me to reflect on the teaching of Aboriginal history.
As regular readers will know, I have been teaching a full semester (six month) course on the history of the broader New England. As shown by the map, the study area covers the New England Tablelands and the surrounding river valleys to the north, south, east and west. This is a large area, larger than many European counties including England, incorporating many sub regions.
The first part of the course traces the history of Aboriginal New England from out of Africa perhaps 72,000 years ago though to 1788. I deal with the impact pf European occupation including the Aboriginal response in two lectures and then try to incorporate subsequent Aboriginal history as elements in the course.
The course has been more demanding than expected. Last year's course was stopped in its tracks by covid requiring it to be spread over the full year. Then I structured first semester 2021 into two groups with with two discussion groups, a structure based in part on the risk that covid might limit the numbers that could be accommodated in the available space. One result was that I ended up with two full lectures a week plus a discussion session. Now I am planning the the third session restructured again to take covid into account. This will start in a bit under two weeks,
The numbers involved are not large, This is an adult education course, not a fully credentialed course targeting larger student numbers delivered within the University system. I did trial external delivery via Facebook group but found that the combination of technical difficulties with my limited time and skills prevented proper action. Still, by the end of 2021 I expect to have some 80 people completing the introductory course with a core group of perhaps 20 who want to go onto further discussion.
The participant reaction to the Aboriginal segments has been interesting. Almost universally, people have liked the story from out of Africa to 1788 because I am telling a story that they have never heard, one informed by new scientific discoveries that throw sudden light on a deep past, Nearly everybody wants this section to be much longer as we try to explore some of the changing detail of Aboriginal history and life.
The Serpentine stone arrangements east of Armidale are one of the major Aboriginal ceremonial sites
Having completed the story of Aboriginal New England I turn to European settlement sketching the penal and pastoral periods ignoring the impacts on Aboriginal peoples. I chose this route because it seemed to me that you needed to understand the pattern of European occupation before you could understand how it affected the Aborigines. When I do address the impact of European occupation people have some knowledge of the long Aboriginal history as well as the patterns and drivers of the settler arrival,
I also try to focus on the Aboriginal response. To my mind, this makes it easier to understand just what happened. In teaching. I try to avoid the current focus on massacres. I do so a number of reasons.
To begin with, a massacre focus is both contested and also largely ignores the multiple factors involved including disease and destruction of habitat. It also treats the Aborigines as passive victims rather than people with agency responding to events that they could not directly control but did respond to as best they could. Presented objectively, it leads people to a sense of shock. It also lies the base for the later treatment of Aboriginal history. Herein lies a problem if we think of Aboriginal history after colonisation as uneasy co-existence, resistance and then survival and now, hopefully, recovery.
The key problem from my viewpoint lies in the absence of current writing that I can draw from. As a general historian writing on a particular area, I necessarily have to rely on secondary sources, I can only do so much original research. There is enough material to allow me to sketch some of the history including key events, but not enough to present a proper synthesis.
This deserves a separate post at some point.
While useful, most national histories suffer because they are based on generalisations, focused on particular key events, The problem here is that Aboriginal history is local, family, regional and jurisdiction based. Only when you have looked at this level can you generate a proper national perspective. And here we have too few regional or jurisdiction studies.
I try to teach history in an objective way, based on the evidence that I have. Of course, I have my own biases.
When I look at Aboriginal history post British settlement including especially the attitudes of the best intentioned members of European society, I find myself myself shaking my head and saying "how could you believe that?!" Too a substantial degree, the worst damage has been done not by the usual suspects but by those who really wanted to make a difference. I suspect that this may be true today.
When I present post frontier events including the role of prejudice I find my class shaking their heads in shock. When I present evidence showing how far the Aboriginal peoples have come from disaster I have found the same reaction. This leads me to my final point.
As a non-Aboriginal person teaching elements of Aboriginal history, I constantly strike trouble. Many, non-Aboriginal as well as Aboriginal, believe that Aboriginal history can only be taught by Aboriginal people.
I do not accept that view. As I reflect on NAIDOC week, I would like to think that my history teaching makes a difference, one that will contribute to our share future.
I have a certain sympathy for Deputy Prime Minister Barnaby Joyce who was fined Monday for his failure to wear a mask. He had filled the car with petrol and then went inside the service station to pay mask-less. Someone reported the matter to the police.
We haven't had to wear masks in our area. The decision to mandate them from Sunday despite the absence of covid here was taken as a consequence of the current Sydney outbreak.
Sunday morning kitten Clyde was found paralyzed and unmoving on the bathroom floor requiring an emergency visit to the vet. The vet suggested a visit to the next door McDonalds for coffee while she ran tests. We entered and after a little while were told that they could not serve us if we did not have a mask. Wandering downtown I was able to get a coffee at one of the stalls at the monthly market. I noticed that there were more masks around although wearing was still patchy.
I still wasn't sure what was going on. Coming home, I called in at the small corner store then at the little bottle-oh. In both cases I was served but told that masks were now mandatory. Now there was a problem. To get masks at the chemist I had to enter the shopping centre and then the chemist but could not do so without a mask! Finally, I found an old one and using that acquired some disposable masks.
Monday I had to buy something, dashed out, reached my destination and realised that I did not have my mask. I came home. Had I been going to a self-serve petrol outlet I might have found myself in the same position as Mr Joyce, filling and then unable to pay without breaching the regulations.
As I said, I have a certain sympathy for Mr Joyce. However, there is a broader issue, the break-down in the social consensus that has made covid restrictions successful. All jurisdictions bear some responsibility for this. Some examples to illustrate.
"I don't want an 18-year-old in Queensland dying from a clotting illness who, if they got COVID, probably wouldn't die.
"We have had very few deaths due to COVID-19 in Australia in people under the age of 50 and wouldn't it be terrible that our first 18-year-old in Queensland who dies related to this pandemic, died because of the vaccine.
Queensland's Chief Health Officer Jeannette Young
The issues associated with AstraZeneca have been widely covered. By the time I received my first injection I was worried about side-effects, but decided that the risk was worthwhile given my age. Since then, official advice has varied although the epidemiological evidence has not really changed.
The emotional intervention by Queensland Chief Health Officer Jeannette Young following the Prime Minister's announcement that AstraZeneca could be accessed by younger Australians was a dramatic over-reaction that, to my mind, reflected the pressures upon her as well as the political stance adopted by the Queensland Premier.
The take-home message that the risks of a younger person dying from covid were less than those rare reactions from AstraZeneca strikes at the heart of the vaccination program, feeding into the narrative that the AstraZeneca vaccine is unsafe. It also feeds into the broader anti-vaxxer story that all vaccines are unsafe. If the risks of a young person dying from covid are lower than those associated with vaccination why bother getting vaccinated? Why take the risk?
The issue is not helped by disagreements among professionals. Each jurisdiction states that it relies on its health experts, that its policy decisions are based on health advice. Leaving aside differences among experts, this statement is misleading in that the decision on that health advice is affected by political circumstances and judgements. This is not a criticism, simply an observation.
The requests from Queensland, Victoria and Western Australia to reduce the quotas on overseas arrivals in Australia are inherently political. Take Queensland as an example.
Queensland is running up against capacity constraints in the existing hotel quarantine system. That's a genuine constraint from a public policy viewpoint. The question of the best way of expanding the quarantine system is a public policy question. However, the broader expressed concerns about the risks of covid leakage from the quarantine system and the responses involve a mix of public heath and political responses.
The public health question involves an assessment of risk and how that risk might best be managed. The political response focuses on the likely community impact and associated costs. These issues involve political as well as public policy responses including how much risk the community is prepared to bear as well a public concerns about preferential treatment for particular groups. .
Simplifying, the Prime Minister's core announcement was an indemnity scheme that would make it easier for those under 40 to accept AstraZeneca should they choose to do so, The responsibility here rests upon individuals who have been advised of the risks by their doctors. This seems perfectly appropriate to me. Since the announcement, there appears to have been a rush of younger Australians to get the AZ jab. This makes perfect sense to me.
Each Australian jurisdiction from the Commonwealth down focuses on those presently living and especially voting within its jurisdiction. This makes perfect sense, but ignores changes elsewhere in a world that is now opening up despite the virus. To many younger mobile Australians, it makes sense to get vaccinated now with AZ not just because it reduces their immediate risks but because it will enable them to travel when the borders open - as they must.
Oh, just to finish, Clyde's x-rays suggested a possible spinal fracture or head damage from a fall or alternatively some form of thrombosis, The prognosis was grim. By nightfall, he was showing some sign of movement although the vet warned he might not last the night. By morning, he was moving and ate something, although he seemed to suffer from sight loss. By the time we picked him up, he was able to walk and was complaining. The vets were amazed!
Moves to expunge the name Ben Boyd from a visible physical presence in Australia continue to gather strength. Examples here, here.
I am a little tired of fighting some of these battles. In a way, I no longer care. Let the chips fall where they may. In the longer term, it probably doesn't matter. However, a word of caution may be advisable.
Those who seek to have Boyd's name removed from settlements, roads and national parks do so because they are opposed to an aspect of his life. They wish to expunge Boyd's physical presence in the present day and replace it by a new narrative, part of an anti-colonial narrative. That is their right, but they risk a perverse result.
Assume that they are successful, Boyd will move from a primary figure to a secondary footnote in another story. Even now, Boyd is largely forgotten. The current debate has, temporarily, restored him to a degree of prominence, but this will pass. Those who wish to use Boyd to teach a moral lesson, to show an historical injustice, would be well advised to maintain his name in some way. Once it goes, so will their narrative.
Human memory is short. If you doubt this, look at the way the Whitlam dismissal has diminished, almost disappeared, from current memory. The passion remains among the diminishing number of those directly or indirectly involved, it has been recently strengthened by some nostalgia pieces, but the dismissal is still moving towards an historical footnote despite the drama involved. Doubt this? Then who was the Australian Governor who dismissed an elected leader, a huge event at the time?
If you wish to preserve our knowledge of Australian history, if you wish to use figures such as Benjamin Boyd to tell a story, you would be well advised to preserve names and monuments to act as an historical peg for your story. Get rid of them, and you risk the destruction of the story you wish to tell.
When Australian governments announced that those in group 1b ( essentially Australians over seventy) were eligible for covid-19 vaccination with the AstraZeneca vaccine I held off because I knew that supplies were limited. Then, with all the controversy over the AZ vaccine, the suggestion that supplies were available because people were refusing it, I decided to move. The results were instructive.
I went to the Government website to identify local GP suppliers. The site said that my GP clinic was not taking bookings, so I went to another GP clinic that was. They said that they were only getting fifty doses per week. More, that they did not know how many doses they would get to the end of the week before. They were now fully booked to the end of May. They suggested that I try my own GP clinic even though they were not taking bookings. I did so.
My GP clinic said that their supply was limited. They were working through from their oldest patients down and were now to 82 year olds. However, as it happened, they had just had a cancellation. If I came in immediately, I could be vaccinated. I did so and now am.
I got in because the dose would have gone to waste otherwise. As I got my shot, the clinic was full of much older Armidalians getting their jabs. The oldest was born in 1929.
When I came home I listened to stories about metro based mass vaccination centres intended to speed the process up. Am I wrong to wonder why governments shouldn't fix up the existing distribution system first on the supply side?! Am I wrong to think that these centres will attract preferential supply and make the existing position in Armidale worse?
The death of Prince Philip affected me more than I had expected, in part because it marked the end of not just one but several eras.
Prince Phillip has been part of my whole life. I don't remember his marriage to Elizabeth, I was too young, although in that immediate post war period our family homes were filled with World War Two memorabilia including multiple things on the Royal Family in the war.
I do remember the 1953 Royal Visit to Australia. It was such a big deal. I did not see the Royal couple on the visit. However, there was massive news real coverage and a special feature film that I watched at the local picture theatre. From there, there were multiple visits.
The Duke of Edinburgh Awards scheme reached Australia in 1959, becoming a key conduit between the Duke and Australia, giving the Duke a a local presence independent of the Queen. In the second half of the sixties, links were established between my old school, The Armidale School (TAS), and Gordonstoun, links that continue to this day.
TAS was an early participant in the Duke of Edinburgh awards, began a student exchange program with Gordonstoun became a member of the Round Square school group. The strong links were established when a TAS teacher visited Gordonstoun on an exchange program. Among other things, he involved Prince Edward with drama, creating another link that continues to this day.
1983. Private visit by Prince Edward to TAS. While there he presented badges to the new day boy houses. Inaugural Green House captain Samuel Blanch on the left, Robert Kirwood, first captain of Ross right. The photo is a bit of a classic!
My own views on the Duke have fluctuated over time. Initially, I thought of him simply as the Queen's husband. Later, I thought of him as something of an old-fuddy duddy prone to gaffes and support for old fashioned causes.
I suppose that there is a certain irony here for some of the causes supported by the Duke and Prince Charles such as conservation and organic farming have become very mainstream indeed.
I was also not a supporter of some of the ethos espoused by Gordonstoun and adopted by Prince Phillip. I dislike regimentation and indeed cold water! Later still, the Duke became just a familiar figure, someone I did not know, we never met, but somehow knew.
When I started this post, my intention was to set Prince Phillip in an historical context, to use him as a window into history. I have wandered. However, I do want to make one final point.
The obituaries have focused on his sense of duty. Today, the idea of duty has become legalised expressed in terms such as duty of care. The old fashioned idea of duty as personal responsibility, responsibility for role independent of forced obligation, seems somehow old fashioned.
I think that's a pity. Perhaps Phillip's death may remind us again of duty in the old fashioned sense.
I have been struggling with the return of racist language and discourse in Australia. It's really taken me by surprise. I thought that we had killed it outside some of those on the left and fringe elements on the right. Now it's back.
I suppose I should start with a simple point. There is no such thing as a race within homo sapiens.
DNA analysis shows us that the actual genetic differences between groups of people are small. It also shows us that we all carry mixed genetic ancestry. The Aborigines, for example, carry Neanderthal and Denisovan genes as well as later additions including those derived from the European occupiers. When we come to others such as those from Western Europe we find a complex admixture of genes that reflect multiple migrations and occupations. In a simple sense, we are all mongrels. Why, then, do we still use the term race?
All human beings belong to groups who use terms to describe themselves and others. For example, the term Hindu describes a group marked by religion.
Those seeking or who hold power within groups use labels to consolidate their position and extend their influence. These labels are applied to those within and outside the group. The BJP promotes Hindu nationalism suggesting that Hindu and India are equivalent. This transforms a religious label into a political label. It also acts to exclude non-Hindus. Further, in pursuit of Hindu nationalism, the nationalists seek to use history including DNA results to establish the history required to support their claims.
I could use other examples, but hope that I have made my point. But why if race has no meaning is it still important? The answer is complex.
The idea of classifying people by race came out of the scientific revolution. Part of that revolution was a classification process focused on the identification and classification of different species, leading to the subdivision of humanity into different races. To this was added social Darwinism, the idea of competition within and between different human groups in which the best rose to the top over time.
Inevitably, those on the top classified themselves as the best and sought to preserve their position. The racial subdivision was never clear cut. If you read Australian official documents, you will find references to the British race and to the Australian race as a variant. The Australian race was seen as superior, but there were concerns whether this could be maintained.
Once you add in social Darwinism, you are left with the uncomfortable thought that you might not survive the competition. Writing in the 1930s, the English travel writer J H Curle was left with the uncomfortable suspicion that the Chinese would become the dominant race.
Racism is deeply associated with fear, In South Africa, fear about African competition for jobs made many European mining and industrial workers support the Boer approach to racial separation. In Australia the same forces played out, this time focused on workers from China and India. It is no coincidence that the Labour movement was the strongest supporter of White Australia to the sometimes distress of the Government in London wrestling with the problems of a multi-cultural Empire.
There was a remarkable and sudden transformation in Australia after the Second World War. Partly driven by fear, we must populate or perish, the country opened its doors to migrants that would come to include migrants from all ethnic groups. Over twenty years, a country whose immigration policy had been based on racial exclusion transformed itself.
Of course there was suspicion of the new arrivals, of course there were examples of ethnic and racial exclusion, most migrant families will testify to that, but it was still a remarkable achievement. By the early 1990s, Australia was celebrating its achievements, This has turned round over the last five years.
One of the measures of this is the rise of racist based movements on the right. They were always there but on the absolute fringes. The detailed reasons for this are beyond this post, but I want to make a few points.
There were always fragilities in the social consensus underpinning the Australian transformation. People need time to adjust when faced with fundamental change. They need to feel that the things that they value are valued still.
In 1957 under the pen name Nino Cullotta, John O'Grady published They're a Weird Mob, the story of an Italian migrant to Australia. The book became a smash hit, as did the subsequent film. Both book and film are criticized today for some of their attitudes, Those criticising the book miss the point. Published just ten years after the start of the mass migration program, the book bridged the gap between traditional Australian stereotypes and the challenges faced by a new migrants. I suspect that in one blow it humanized the entire Italian migrant community,
The social consensus underpinning Australia's migrant and multi-ethic success began to break down in the 1990s in the face of constant change. The formation of One Nation in 1997 was a sign of this.
This process has accelerated over the last few years as those on the left continue to hammer the theme of Australia as a racist society. In so doing, they have recreated a race based debate drawing on overseas events that pits whites against the rest.
I may say that this is silly, that there is no such thing as race, but by attaching a label you may create the very thing that you are opposing. The War on Terror is a case in point. Now we are seeing the same thing in the rise of white racism, with the label creating the very thing that the attacks are meant to stop.
I never expected that certain fringe groups that I opposed in the past would become a major threat. I still think that the present position is controllable. However, the threat is there.
Australia has become a more fragmented society in economic, cultural and demographic terms. Resentments have grown. Scope exists for a right wing political leader to emerge capable of capturing the different resentments. That leader will not come from the extreme right, but will need to capture some of their views.
Writing takes time and money. Contributions welcome to help me maintain an independent voice.
Welcome
Welcome to the sometimes confused meanderings of a busy personal and professional life.
This, my strictly personal blog, is one of a suite of blogs and web sites exploring different aspects of my personal and professional life. You will find the list on the side bar under Belshaw blogs. Please explore.
My blogs are all open blogs. I welcome civilised discussion. I can be contacted via ndarala(at)optusnet(dot)com(dot)au.
