I don't think there is any issue which gives me more internal conflict than watching the matter of indigenous issues and politics in Australia.
Yesterday, I see there were very large "invasion day" marches, indicating that the "change the date" movement (with which I have sympathy, given the rather non-crucial connection the actual date had with the creation of the modern Australian nation in the first place) is stronger than ever.
I further sympathise with the view that the mistreatment of aborigines as the colony expanded has long been underappreciated, as is the general "caught between two cultures" dilemma that befell them. (European arrival so frequently has had the same effect - with high rates of alcoholism, poor education results and apparent listlessness in remote communities, and welfare dependence.) I was leery at first of the effect of the Mabo decision, but it has been implemented in a way that hasn't had (as far as I know) any detrimental effect on reasonable development. I really dislike how people on the Right (such as Andrew Bolt) can oversimplify the matter of aboriginal identity, and take a pretty sneery attitude to the whole matter of how long the effect of historical culture shock can reach into modern life. The attitude is rather like the obnoxious "it's your choice whether to take offence at words" meme of libertarians, thereby giving free reign to the obnoxious.
On the other hand: I don't doubt that much of what passes for respect for aboriginal culture is genuinely what those on the (pretty obnoxious) Right call mere "virtue signalling" - such as "acknowledgement of traditional owners" statements made even to rooms where it is clear there is no descendent of a traditional owner present as a guest or observer; yesterday's "#AlwaysWasAlwaysWillBe" on Twitter, in which many Lefty celebs appeared to be agreeing with activists that land over which Aboriginal groups have no meaningful control must still be called Aboriginal land; incorporation of aboriginal ceremonies which are, in key respects, modern inventions; trying to wring way, way more out of aboriginal knowledge as relevant to modern education than is reasonable; disregarding the historically harsh aspects of aboriginal societies in terms of treatment of women; and, yes, some people of very limited aboriginal ancestry who insist it is still of vital relevance to their identity. Seriously, at some point you have to imagine that Chinese tourists watching some aboriginal dance troupe doing their thing must be thinking "I didn't know aborigines could be white."
It just seems so hard to get both sides to stop with factual and rhetorical exaggerations on the matter - and to express mutual good will. It makes me dislike both sides.
Update: the rhetoric of Ms Onus-Williams is a good example of why it is so difficult to be completely onside with aboriginal advocacy groups, and to be annoyed with virtue signallers who don't call it out. If she wants the Andrew Bolts and Tim Blairs of the world to show some greater sympathy to historical wrongs, she needs to get real herself.
... It makes me dislike both sides.
ReplyDeleteYes, that is the problem for anyone standing on the sidelines. The debate has become nonsensical and nonproductive. Steve I don't now that can be fixed.
Australia became a nation on January 1 not 26. Solved!
ReplyDelete