Today I heard of the UN General Assembly vote on the Israeli wall. Apparently, it was US, Australia, and a few island states (whose poverty-sticken votes, I guess, were somehow influenced) who sided with Israel. Just Australia standing with the US against the world. That's today's Australia for you. Some would look with pride. I don't.
And that was followed by our Foreign Minister concerned with the vociferous complaints of East Timor, which should be so happy with Australia's recent military actions (that, at least, was a fine hour for Australia, even if it was rather late). They should negotiate in confidence, he argued. (I thought, "like good businessmen, commercial-in-confidence, the new Australian form of political accountability"). This was in light of Australia's refusal to accept a role for the International Court of Justice, or an independent third party (New Zealand was suggested), to assist the two countries to reach a resolution. Rich country, poor country. This is not even negotiation for a fair contract, it seems to me.
There's more every day, if you just open your ears ...
21 July 2004
Cricket: the new history of Aboriginal Australia
It's more with despair than anger that I write this entry. The Canberra Times yesterday recorded the excitement at the National Museum of Australia in the purchase of a boomerang which was supposed to be used by the first Australian cricket team in Britain, which happened to be a (very successful) Aboriginal team. Well, it's an interesting story, and the purchase of a historical artefact like that is a good thing to celebrate. But it was obvious from day 1 that this is the new view of Australian history - the white blindfold view.
So, the history of Australian Aborigines will now be celebrated as one of assimilation of those poor deprived souls into an all-conquering and civilised European (specifically Anglo) culture. The merging of cricket and converted blacks appears to be just too, too much for the NMA to resist. It's the new, relaxed (and blind) view of Australia's history of mateship and a fair go. The Howard view writ large. Sad, but so transparent. And I can imagine the view of the much-revered Australian mainstream becoming relaxed and comfortable with the good deeds we have done, and continue to do, for our poor, backward cousins, as we offer tham a hand-up to our rich, civilised culture.
Several years ago, I could have been swayed, but the "Bringing them home" report on the Stolen Generations changed all that. I was a parent of young children at the time, and close enough to cry at the thought of children removed from their mothers and family and culture. Most defenders just attacked the report as overly emotive, and denied there really was a stolen generation. They called it "political correctness" to use such terms (despite having learnt so well the lesson of controlling thought through language). And there were even those defenders who recognised these events happened, but argued it was for their own good. Paternalistic, and confirmed to remain ignorant of their own thought processes. Look at LO'D, they'd say, or some other successful black who had made it good given a white upbringing and education. But listen to LO'D and you had a different view.
Remember, I was a parent of young children. For once, rationality could not overcome emotional grief at the stories of children being taken from parents. Too, too close to home. They lost me on that one. And the amazing thing it that it just confirmed my disbelief in so many of their other claims.
You can fool all of the people some of the time, and some of the people all of the time, but not all of the people all of the time.
But I open today's Canberra Times (Doubts over tour boomerang's origin, by Robert Messenger, in Canberra Times, 21 July 2004, p. 1-2) to amusement with a front-page article on doubts on the authenticity of this very boomerang. Amusing and appropriate. Apparently there were two cricketers called Twopenny, and this boomerang may have been used by the wrong one! Trust some academic in Canberra to report this. As the local Canb Times editor (Jack Waterford) often states, there's an expert on every subject in Canberra. That's perhaps why we're not so easily fooled. (Although Howard's "mainstream" probably thinks that's why we are so easily fooled!)
This new ideological broom is sweeping political correctness from the National Museum, and I despair, but I can laugh at their little mistakes.
So, the history of Australian Aborigines will now be celebrated as one of assimilation of those poor deprived souls into an all-conquering and civilised European (specifically Anglo) culture. The merging of cricket and converted blacks appears to be just too, too much for the NMA to resist. It's the new, relaxed (and blind) view of Australia's history of mateship and a fair go. The Howard view writ large. Sad, but so transparent. And I can imagine the view of the much-revered Australian mainstream becoming relaxed and comfortable with the good deeds we have done, and continue to do, for our poor, backward cousins, as we offer tham a hand-up to our rich, civilised culture.
Several years ago, I could have been swayed, but the "Bringing them home" report on the Stolen Generations changed all that. I was a parent of young children at the time, and close enough to cry at the thought of children removed from their mothers and family and culture. Most defenders just attacked the report as overly emotive, and denied there really was a stolen generation. They called it "political correctness" to use such terms (despite having learnt so well the lesson of controlling thought through language). And there were even those defenders who recognised these events happened, but argued it was for their own good. Paternalistic, and confirmed to remain ignorant of their own thought processes. Look at LO'D, they'd say, or some other successful black who had made it good given a white upbringing and education. But listen to LO'D and you had a different view.
Remember, I was a parent of young children. For once, rationality could not overcome emotional grief at the stories of children being taken from parents. Too, too close to home. They lost me on that one. And the amazing thing it that it just confirmed my disbelief in so many of their other claims.
You can fool all of the people some of the time, and some of the people all of the time, but not all of the people all of the time.
But I open today's Canberra Times (Doubts over tour boomerang's origin, by Robert Messenger, in Canberra Times, 21 July 2004, p. 1-2) to amusement with a front-page article on doubts on the authenticity of this very boomerang. Amusing and appropriate. Apparently there were two cricketers called Twopenny, and this boomerang may have been used by the wrong one! Trust some academic in Canberra to report this. As the local Canb Times editor (Jack Waterford) often states, there's an expert on every subject in Canberra. That's perhaps why we're not so easily fooled. (Although Howard's "mainstream" probably thinks that's why we are so easily fooled!)
This new ideological broom is sweeping political correctness from the National Museum, and I despair, but I can laugh at their little mistakes.
16 July 2004
Israel and that wall
"In pursuing this course, Prime Minister Sharon, a long-time patron of extremist settlers, has led Israel down a path of unprecedented peril. His policy behaviour has substantially weakened Israel's moral and political positions in world politics. Under Sharon, in the words of the recently retired speaker of Israel's Knesset, Avraham Burg, Israel today lacks both 'a just path' and 'an ethical leadership', and 'the Israeli nation rests on a scaffolding of corruption, and on foundations of oppression and injustice'. Burg also concludes that 'the countdown to the end of Israeli society has begun'". ("Israel likely to pay a high price for its defiance on West Bank wall", by Amin Saikal, in Canberra Times, 16 July 2004, p. 15).
Selective service is not the draft ... just ready for it
The US is fully prepared to draft young men for war. I was stunned to find this site: Selective Service System. Registration of virtually all 18-26 year old men is in place, and all it needs is a vote of Congress to activate the draft.
Just another suggestion of a US obsession with guns and power and war. How can so powerful a country appear so fearful? Especially when they spend more on defence than the rest of the world put together. To my mind, the US needs to display more of its good side - its culture, its passion, its commitment to bold political ideas, and also more generosity. I trust it's there. They'd find other cultures warming to them, and they'd ultimately have more influence than they presently have with their current warlike, fearful and self-opinionated stance.
Just another suggestion of a US obsession with guns and power and war. How can so powerful a country appear so fearful? Especially when they spend more on defence than the rest of the world put together. To my mind, the US needs to display more of its good side - its culture, its passion, its commitment to bold political ideas, and also more generosity. I trust it's there. They'd find other cultures warming to them, and they'd ultimately have more influence than they presently have with their current warlike, fearful and self-opinionated stance.
10 July 2004
To know history
"Our armies do not come into your cities and lands as conquerors or enemies, but as liberators. Your wealth has been stripped of you by unjust men ... The government of Iraq, and the future of your country, will soon belong to you ... We will end a brutal regime .. so that Iraqis can live in security". It was a new on on me when I read it this morning. The speaker is General FS Maude, Commander of the British Forces to the people of Mesopotamia, 1917. Just goes to show the importance of knowing your history, and the truth of the adage "whoever doesn't know history, is bound to repeat is" or thereabouts.
03 July 2004
An apt quote
This is not one I had read or heard before, but it's particularly apt for the AginSpin blog. It's quoted in a review of a book on war correspondents (Denise Leith. Bearing witness: the lives of war correspondents and photojournalists. Random House, 2004) which further quotes Susan Sontag from "Regarding the pain of others". "[A]fter a certain age [no one] has the right to this kind of innocence, of superficiality, to this degree of ignorance, or amnesia". And yet, I contend that our politics, and especially this current Australian government, are trying to do exactly that. "Relaxed and comfortable" has a meaning, and this is it. As the National Museum falls into the cricket, ANZAC and explorers view of Australia, we see our cultural blindfold settling. What of the future? Or in the shorter term, what of this coming election?
02 July 2004
A universal aim of the power hungry is to stifle dissent
Tony Fitzgerald's speech for the launch of Margo Kingston's new book "Not happy, John!" has the title "Howard a 'radical'". I have always thought of Howard as an economic radical, but a social conservative. Given the change, the return to the future model he's having us digest, perhaps he is radical all round. To me, he's ideological, and prepared to trash our institutions to insinuate his ideologies. The frightening thing is that this may not be one-sided. I certainly don't feel comfortable with a Latham alternative, despite any hope for Howard to be rolled this time around.
See the text of Tony Fitzgerald speech "Howard a 'radical'" on Margo Kingston's SMH Webdiary
See the text of Tony Fitzgerald speech "Howard a 'radical'" on Margo Kingston's SMH Webdiary
01 July 2004
Empiricism or rationalism?
This was an eye opener for me. I had always thought myself rational, although I had recognised that a logical structure built on false assumptions is valueless, and possibly dangerous, and thus we have to continually test our assumptions. I interpret it this way: by all means, use logic to build your expectations, but continue to test against observations (I was about to write "reality", but that's a loaded word these days, too) and be aware of your assumptions. In science, I guess this would be finding the best current approximation to reality (here I'll use the word!) through testable hypotheses.
"The philosophy of experience is known as empiricism. Empiricism says that a concept is valid only if it is derived from, or is testable by, experience. The alternative theory is ‘rationalism’, the view that truth cannot be attained otherwise than by reasoning from self-evident first principles. The rationalist paradigm of knowledge is logic, the empiricist paradigm is science. Empirical knowledge is less certain than logic; it is tentative, responsive to new evidence and better research, always open to test. It is therefore the very embodiment of the spirit of preparedness to learn. Outside the formal disciplines of logic and mathematics there are no absolute certainties -- except of course in religion, which abounds in them, to the extent that people commit murder for their sake. But the experience of history always shows the danger of dogma. What additional bitterness of experience is needed before we learn to return dogma to the kennels of history whence it came?"
The reason of things : living with philosophy / AC Grayling. London: Phoenix, 2003. p.159
"The philosophy of experience is known as empiricism. Empiricism says that a concept is valid only if it is derived from, or is testable by, experience. The alternative theory is ‘rationalism’, the view that truth cannot be attained otherwise than by reasoning from self-evident first principles. The rationalist paradigm of knowledge is logic, the empiricist paradigm is science. Empirical knowledge is less certain than logic; it is tentative, responsive to new evidence and better research, always open to test. It is therefore the very embodiment of the spirit of preparedness to learn. Outside the formal disciplines of logic and mathematics there are no absolute certainties -- except of course in religion, which abounds in them, to the extent that people commit murder for their sake. But the experience of history always shows the danger of dogma. What additional bitterness of experience is needed before we learn to return dogma to the kennels of history whence it came?"
The reason of things : living with philosophy / AC Grayling. London: Phoenix, 2003. p.159
Missile defence: physicist says it all
The scientists have been consistently open on this issue, ever since its first incarnation under Reagan. They're the one's who'd know. Who am I to say otherwise. Here's a recent quote.
"'This is perfectly reasonable, since a non-working missile defense system should be sufficient to deter a non-existent threat from Iran or North Korea.' Bob Park, editor of the American Physical Society's "What's New" newsletter, on the US Senate Armed Services Committee's decision to deploy the missile system without independent tests to prove it works (18 June)"
Quoted in New scientist, Vol. 182, no. 2453, 26 June 2004, p. 12
"'This is perfectly reasonable, since a non-working missile defense system should be sufficient to deter a non-existent threat from Iran or North Korea.' Bob Park, editor of the American Physical Society's "What's New" newsletter, on the US Senate Armed Services Committee's decision to deploy the missile system without independent tests to prove it works (18 June)"
Quoted in New scientist, Vol. 182, no. 2453, 26 June 2004, p. 12
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
