We're having a moment

People, people:  let's calm down a bit.

It's always tricky, judging where righteous anger turns into counter-productive acts of mere symbolism which start to ostracise maximum public support for worthwhile reforms.

But some of the things going on at the moment are starting look like they are tipping over that edge.


Update:  on Aboriginal issues - I just managed to read Henry Ergas's column today in the Australian (you can get to it behind the paywall if you go to the link on his tweet.)   I think he's going to cop some criticism for the way he gets to an end position that I have suggested many times.

Look at these paragraphs:

It was not indigenous Australians who destroyed thousands of Aboriginal jobs in country areas by suddenly raising the wages of cattle station labour in 1965; it was the Commonwealth Conciliation and Arbitration Commission.

Nor was it indigenous Australians who decided, just as the commission’s judgment was having its devastating effects, to massively subsidise remote Aboriginal settlements, condemning generation after generation to inadequate housing, an education scarcely worth having and a future shorn of jobs and hope; it was the Whitlam and Fraser governments.

And it was not indigenous Australians who removed the prohibitions on the consumption of alcohol by, and the sale of alcohol to, Aboriginal people that had been in force throughout Australia since 1929.

It was state and territory governments that, in keeping with the 1960s zeitgeist of self-determination, repealed those controls and decriminalised public drunkenness, plunging fraying Aboriginal communities into a spiral of alcohol-fuelled violence and helping to ensure that indigenous offenders are nearly three times more likely than non-indigenous offenders to be intoxicated when they commit their crimes.

This annoys even me - someone who has never managed to find much interest in aboriginal culture. (So sue me: I find cities and technology of any kind more interesting than low tech hunter/gathering, or even low level farming if you want to believe Pascoe.)

I just think it's counterproductive and insulting to suggest that following "the zeitgeist" of self - determination was the wrong thing to do over the last 70 years.   I think it's even wrong to broadly suggest that government was wrong to support at least those substantial settlements where people did want to keep a connection to land.

But at the end of the day - yes I think it is fair to say that the problem is that living in a location, or even a cultural milieu (such a family with a long history of welfare dependence, even if within a town) with little or no chance of having a strong connection to the economy (not just in a financial sense, but in the broader human sense of the opportunities for a broader range of life experiences) causes boredom and a sense of lack of purpose.   (Which leads to drug abuse, higher crime, and continues in a cycle.)   But the trick is how to encourage people to get out of the situation, and the balance between self determination and policies to encourage people to make the choice to try something new.

This is a challenge for all indigenous peoples in the modern world.  Cultural pride (and our respect for their mistreatment in the past) can take some a certain distance to self respect and good functioning in the modern world; but to be honest, the evidence is that, at least for the Australian situation, it's not going to be a universal panacea to their problems.   I do wish well intentioned people would stop thinking that it is.