I feel a little sorry for Anthony Albanese, actually. I mean, there must have at least been a chance that the Coalition would support a Yes vote, and as such, you would expect low blowback on the PM if it failed.
Also, it is very unlucky to have timed it accidentally with apocalyptic events in the Middle East that really make having to vote on a matter that could end in mere symbolism (it is, after all, to set up a body that the government can ignore - or if annoyed enough, reduce to a one person office in Birdsville) look like small change that is hard to get excited about, in the scheme of things.
And, as I have been complaining, the hyperbole about the importance of a Yes outcome has only had the opposite effect from that intended - making many more cynical of the whole exercise, especially when there has been a significant number of indigenous voices on the No side. (Not just Mundine and Price, either.)
So, what do I think will happen if the vote is indeed No, as seems inevitable from the polling?
I don't think Albanese will lose that much political skin over it, to be honest. I think he might be seen as doing something he sincerely thought was the right thing to do, with the "it's our way or the highway" approach by the high profile activists such as Langton and Pearson bearing a high proportion of the blame for its failure.
His political judgement will be questioned as it does indicate a deaf ear as to how indigenous issues play out in the mind of the wider community, which is arguably more sharply attuned than academia, the non-Murdoch media, and corporate elites, to a lot of the Emperors New Clothes aspects of the last couple of decades of indigenous advocacy . (My posts here and here on the Dark Emu attempt to re-write history, and here, about things anthropologists used to write about, show what I mean. Also, as a few of my recent posts have argued, the whole premise of the Yes campaign has been that "listening" hasn't been happening, which is really a nonsense shown up by reading the ABC, or doing your own Googling.)
But even so, it's not like there is going to be any institutional attacks against him, because they all rushed to say they were completely onside! See this amazing list of professional bodies that said "Yes" is the way forward.
And furthermore, with a sort of delicious irony, I don't see Dutton getting any significant boost from Albanese's woes - he is just too naturally dislikeable for that, and it's also such a transparently cynical game to tell the nation they should vote No, and then blame Albanese for "dividing the nation". It's very close to a bully's "see what you've made me do" line that never works.
But, who knows, I could be wrong.
I also wouldn't be surprised if he (Albanese) lets it rest a while, and then reverses and does legislate a Voice organisation without the constitutional change first. I don't think he'll be punished for that, at least if the amount of money involved is shown to be relatively modest. It's the same as asking a leader in an election if they will stay in the job all of the next term - everyone knows they will say "yes", and everyone knows it's the type of promise routinely broken.
We will see...
Update: Oh my...Lidia Thorpe is now saying that the Voice ought to be legislated even if there is a no vote. Some strange twists in all of this...
What a day for seriously depressing headlines at the Washington Post:
That last story contains a table with interesting figures for the most overdose prone occupations:
No surprises in number 2, I guess.
Also, the relationship between higher education and not overdosing seems really strong.
But anyway - back to the simply depressing:
I don't know, but if the aliens taking snapshots of us are really about to stage an intervention, as so many loose nuts on Twitter seem to think now, this would probably be a good time to distract the world from other things...
I don't know: while it's appalling judgement for a politician to make a statement as simplistic as "I stand with Palestine" when its leadership has just carried out a terrorist attack aimed largely at civilians, I also feel that if an Israeli newspaper can say this:
then the pro-Jewish lobby outside of Israel should cut some slack to Westerners who dare say something similar...
Noel Pearson says he will walk away from
advocating for a “middle path” of compromise if the voice to parliament
referendum fails, claiming reconciliation would not be viable in the
event of a no vote.
The longtime Indigenous activist and
respected community leader says he would instead allow a new generation
of Indigenous leaders to chart a different path forward.
Pearson
said he fears “for the future of my people” if the referendum is
defeated on Saturday, making a late plea for voters to vote yes in
recognition of Australia’s history and avoid a failure he says would be
“ugly as sin”.
“We’re reduced to being told by the no campaign ‘leave it to the
politicians’,” Pearson told Guardian Australia. “My pitch to the
Australian people, is, ‘Guys, you know that will not work. You know that
relying on politicians will not work. It hasn’t worked in the past and
won’t work in the future.’”
Apart from the terrible events in Israel and Gaza, it's very depressing to read the MAGA reaction in America, where they live in a fantasy conspiracy world that means absolutely everything bad that happens in the world is the direct fault of Biden/Democrats/Leftists (basically, anyone who isn't in their cult of "our Leader would have prevented this".)
Also depressing to see how the MAGA blame game spreads like wildfire through Twitter/X, and the mainstream press kind of ignores it, for now.
Eggplant pasta casserole: bake chopped eggplant and at same time, halve a red capsicum and put it in the oven too. About 30 min at around 180 to 200 degrees. The capsicum skin will be able to be peeled off when it cools down.
Cut two chorizo sausages into discs and fry both sides. Take out and drain off some of the rendered oil. Fry up a chopped onion in the same pan, and a few cloves of garlic. Add around a teaspoon chili flakes.
Here's the bit I need to remember...I used 300g (dry weight) of penne pasta and wasn't sure how much sauce it needed. I used a 400 ml bottle of passata, maybe 100 ml of pasta water, and about half a can of crushed tomatoes. It worked out to be enough. So, about 600 to 700 ml of sauce.
Cook pasta, and while that's going, add the passata to the onions, throw in the chopped up baked capsicum and chorizo. I guess the eggplant could go in too, although I just added it to the casserole dish.
Anyway, the drained pasta goes in casserole dish and, of course, the tomato sauce with everything else goes in and mix it well. Some green vegetable wouldn't hurt...I actually used fresh broadbeans for the first time in my life, but their taste got a bit lost. I think broccolini would work well.
Makes quite a strong case, though. Some surprising parts:
Ohiosticks out — for all the wrong reasons. Roughly 1 in 5
Ohioans will die before they turn 65, according to Montez’s analysis
using the state’s 2019 death rates. The state, whose legislature has
been increasingly dominated by Republicans, has plummeted nationally
when it comes to life expectancy rates, moving from middle of the packto the bottomfifth of statesduring the last 50 years, The Post found.Ohioans have a similar life expectancy to residents ofSlovakia and Ecuador, relatively poor countries.
Like other hard-hit Midwestern counties, Ashtabula has seen a rise in
what are known as “deaths of despair” — drug overdoses, alcoholism and
suicides — prompting federal and state attentionin recent years.But here, as well as in mostcounties across the United States, those types of deaths are far outnumbered by deaths caused by cardiovasculardisease, diabetes, smoking-related cancers and other health issues for residents between35 and64 years old, The Post found.Between
2015 and 2019, nearly five times as many Ashtabula residents in their
prime died of chronic medical conditions as died of overdoses, suicide
and all other external causes combined, according to The Post analysis
of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s death records.
Most of the article is about two public health issues - tobacco taxes and car seat belt laws. Libertarians are bad for health.
There just doesn’t seem to be enough of the Solar System. Beyond
Neptune’s orbit lie thousands of small icy objects in the Kuiper belt,
with Pluto its most famous resident. But after 50 astronomical units
(AU)—50 times the distance between Earth and the Sun—the belt ends
suddenly and the number of objects drops to zero. Meanwhile, in other
solar systems, similar belts stretch outward across hundreds of AU. It’s
disquieting, says Wesley Fraser, an astronomer at the National Research
Council Canada. “One odd thing about the known Solar System is just how
bloody small we are.”
A new discovery is challenging that picture. While using ground-based
telescopes to hunt for fresh targets for NASA’s New Horizons spacecraft,
now past Pluto on a course out of the Solar System, Fraser and his
colleagues have made a tantalizing, though preliminary, discovery: about a dozen objects
that lie beyond 60 AU—nearly as far from Pluto as Pluto is from the
Sun. The finding, if real, could suggest that the Kuiper belt either
extends much farther than once thought or—given the seeming 10-AU gap
between these bodies and the known Kuiper belt—that a “second” belt
exists.
I like this bit of added mystery:
Just as intriguing as the new objects is the apparent gap between 50 and
60 AU, says Mihály Horányi, a space physicist at the University of
Colorado Boulder who oversees New Horizons’s dust counter. “One way or
another, something is responsible for maintaining that gap.” In other
solar systems, planets orbiting within a dusty disk carve gaps by
hoovering up material. But no large planet has been seen in the gap. The
gap could also be a relic from the Solar System’s infancy, caused by
waves of pressure in the disk.
Hey, I still like the idea that a very small, primordial black hole is rambling around the edge of the solar system.
There are currently 110 advisory
committees or groups that "develop policies and provide advice on
specific issues" registered on the federal government website.
Some
of them you might have never heard of, or even noticed were advising
the government, such as The National Blood Borne Virus and Sexually
Transmissible Infections Surveillance Subcommittee or the Foods for
Early Childhood Reference Group.
Each
group holds a number of experts in their field, such as the 31 medical
professionals who work for the aforementioned subcommittee on sexually
transmitted diseases.
The Voice is expected to work in the same way in that it would be set up to give advice to the government
Question: is the expectation that "advisory committees" would in future not just be approaching Government directly with recommendations, but also (or alternatively?) having to urge the Voice to take up the issue? Is the Voice going to be a "filter" for all, or most, or none, of the current groups on recommendations to government?
The Voice group itself is said to likely be something like this:
The government hopes the Voice
would be the first body designed with gender balance in mind and the
members peer elected on a national scale.
According
to a current proposal of the body, which is subject to consultative
change, something else that differentiates the Voice from any other
Indigenous advisory group is its geographical spread, of the proposed 24
members.
Two from each state
and territory — 16 all up, five from remote communities, two from the
Torres Strait and one representing Torres Strait Islanders on the
mainland.
Individuals would
serve four-year terms and would only be allowed to serve twice and two
full-time co-chairs would be elected by the members themselves.
Now, for this group to be effective, and to potentially be on the receiving end of submissions from more than 100 current groups, there is no doubt at all that it is going to have to have a substantial staff. What's the likely staffing ratio, and the travel costs? I see that in 2004, an ATSIC commissioner got $136,000 or so in total remuneration. Bringing that up to date, I would guess that $200,000 would be in the ballpark? Times 24, that's less than $5 million, but does it include travel expenses, which I assume will be substantial. But how many staff does it need? The total cost might not be huge, in terms of government expenditure overall, but it's still a diversion of funds.
All of which is to achieve - what exactly? Essentially a "feel good" exercise in empowerment.
The fundamental reason for seriously considering a "no" vote is that such an organisation would be, essentially, an expensive duplication of advocacy that is already happening - and at least in some cases - already achieving results.
The reason such bodies might work fine in some countries, but the same is likely to be an ongoing source of friction in ours, is because of the size of Australia, which results in the vast number of "first nations" competing for attention for very differing issues in different parts of the country.
In short - there are a lot of racist and bad reasons for arguing against it. There are also solid practical reasons for at least considering a "No" vote...
Update: May God forgive me for what I am about to do: cite a Quadrant article with approval -
As NPR reports, the disease is ridiculously widespread in parts of Africa:
For example, in Burkina Faso in West Africa, pretty much everyone
gets malaria. Last year, out of a population of 20-some million, about
half got sick. Halidou Tinto was one of
them. He leads the Clinical Research Unit of Nanaro in the country. His
six-year-old twins also fell ill with malaria this year.
"As
soon as [the children] are febrile or they complain about headache,"
Tinto says, "you have to think about malaria and treat them immediately.
And you can avoid any bad outcome of the disease."
The worst
outcome is death. Tinto says 4,000 people died of malaria last year in
Burkina Faso alone. In 2021, across Africa, it's estimated that 619,000
died of the mosquito-borne disease, most of them children.
"People are living with the disease," says Tinto. "But of course, we are not happy and we are not proud of this."
But on the "up" side:
They're the first vaccines designed to work against a human parasite.
The
first, called RTS,S, was unveiled almost two years ago. The second one,
recommended by the World Health Organization this week, is called
R21/Matrix-M and is intended for children between 5 and 36 months, who
are among the most vulnerable to the disease....
This is what makes WHO's approval of the second malaria vaccine such
welcome news. Tinto ran the clinical trials in Burkina Faso that led to
its recommendation. Across four African countries, these trials showed a
75% reduction in malaria cases in the year following vaccination of
young children.
"I am very, very happy," says Tinto, "and we are pretty sure this vaccine will have a big impact in term[s] of public health."
An increase in the cost of house insurance has been in the news lately, and this year, yes, I was surprised that my RACQ Insurance home and contents cover went up from about $2,000 last year to $2,400. (I have not made a claim on it for perhaps 8 years?)
I rang them and asked if there was a way to trim the policy cost (for example, flood cover was automatically in it, and my house is far, far above any conceivable flood line.) No, I was told, this is just standard, and (I didn't bother checking if this is true) they define flood to include all water entry, including from an overflowing roof, for example.
I did some online quote searching, and quickly found a company that would do the same cover (using the same cost of rebuilding, and the same contents cover as in the RACQ renewal.) It was about $1,800.
I then did another search, and found cover at $1,700.
RACQ Insurance cover my family's cars as well, and I recently had to put a claim through them, and they are very easy to deal with. Once, in the past, I even had to ring them on Christmas morning for some reason (I forget why - I think it might have been to do with whether my son was listed as an authorised driver for a car) and they were there, and able to deal with it immediately. So, generally, I like dealing with them.
But when it comes to house and contents, something seems to have gone seriously wrong with their financial exposure if they are $700 more expensive than some of their competitors....
* Elon's plaything is still kind of amusing because of the way my version of it has been chock full of the more nutty kind of UFO content in the last week. I'm not sure whether this is happening to everyone who uses "X", or just me because I do click on some of those tweets.
* Given Musk's boosterism to Right wing and Trumpian politics, there must be many, many users who would love to drop it, but the alternative app has still not appeared. What is the problem??
* The Republicans in Congress look, and are, a complete shambles. Newt Gingrich says creepy Gaetz must go. Gaetz leaves open the prospect of someone outside of Congress could be speaker. (The only thing stopping him suggesting Trump is presumably the amount of time Trump has to spend in court - but as if lazy Trump would take on a job that requires long hours and understanding stuff.) Even Fox News doesn't seem to know how to handle it.
Once again, I give credit to the ABC in telling a story that shows how government programs have been working with aboriginal communities for health improvement (as I showed last week has also been happening with rheumatoid heart disease.) This time it's improvement in trachoma rates.
On the pro-Voice side, it's being held as an example of why 'listening' works, and the implication being that the Voice will increase the amount of listening.
On the 'the Voice is completely unnecessary' side, we have the fact that, well, we didn't need the Voice to get these improvements. Now, I really do think Warren Mundine is a flaky guy, but his point on this story is pretty valid, even if he goes over the top in the claim as to how much money a Voice organisation is likely to cost:
Warren Mundine, one of leaders of
the No Campaign, said the success of trachoma demonstrated that
Indigenous people already had a voice and what was really needed was
better coordination of services.
"Through
the Voice process, we're going to spend hundreds of millions of dollars
when that money can be better spent actually doing similar things that
this health project did," he said.
He
said the problems of housing, health and education were largely state
government responsibilities that would not be solved with a federal
voice to parliament.
While I would agree that the "no" side has the nuttiest people on it, I also am somewhat amused as to how on the "yes" side you have so many on the arts and entertainment industry showing themselves as stereotypically completely captured by emotional arguments that are full of hyperbole. I forget who I saw this morning saying "if you vote no, you want the indigenous gap to get worse". It's like they refuse to think more deeply about matters beyond sloganeering.
I'll be kind and first list the good points: yes, I think the acting is fine, and Cillian Murphy is aged very realistically in the multiple periods in which he appears. I like the fact that an incredible scientific and engineering undertaking is given attention in a widely watched movie, and that (as far as I can tell, in checking up on various websites since seeing it) the movie is mostly historically accurate. As a rider to that last point, though, it is a tad annoying to find out that a really important - virtually the pivotal - scene is an invention*. Still, it seems the truth is almost never palatable enough for dramatic re-creation if it's a bio-pic instead of a documentary.
OK, so for the bad points. And the first is really bad. I realised after perhaps 30 or 45 minutes that the orchestral soundtrack was always there, far from subtle, and would simply never shut up so we could have some dialogue experienced as in real life - in silence, or with just some ambient sound. It felt like there was barely 5 minutes of audio calm (specifically, no orchestra, or the various "jump booms" which happen every now and then) in the entire movie. At the half way point, I had already decided that it felt like the composer was using a hammer to try to beat me into submission.
Now, I know, lots of people on line have praised the score. But there are some on line who agree (and who complain that the audio mixing generally sometimes made dialogue a strain to hear. Even my son agreed with that.) Some examples of commentary I agree with:
Everyone talked like they knew they were in an Important Historical
Drama and the music was constantly insisting on emotions the film wasn’t
doing anything to earn....
The draining score was there to artificially inject superficial tension....
For me the sound was so unnecessarily loud that I literally facepalmed
during the movie. The sound mix was so brazen that it made me wish I’d
watched this on streaming with subtitles, it’s borderline disrespectful
to the audience to make a movie so loud. I’m amazed that Nolan gets away
with it. Surprising that the score doesn’t get an acting credit, it’s
so blatantly front and centre in so many scenes
And, by the way, given that I am something of a Nolan sceptic (while liking some of his films), I didn't realise that loud and peculiar audio mix that interferes with hearing dialogue has been a repeat feature of many of his films. There's an entire article about that here, from before Oppenheimer opened. This film has only confirmed the problem.
On a bigger point, and why I think the movie is interesting but far from great, is it felt more like an exercise in Nolan showing us how clever he is with his complicated and dense screenplay, rather than making something that could have been much more emotionally affecting. And from a dramatic structure point of view, while I understand that the back and forth can make for a more interesting way to tell a story, I still didn't understand why it needed to feel exhaustingly frenetic from the start, and to have a sense of urgency during parts of the story that, well, didn't need it. Arguably, I suppose, you could say that it does become less urgent in the last third - which is the opposite of normal dramatic structure, and does have the odd effect of making you wonder why the narrative has always been about a different character we don't really have any reason to be interested in.
In short, I don't think the dramatic structure works, and the movie would have been much better if it had some breathing spaces ever now and then, and let tension and urgency build more naturally. The climatic explosion, by the way, felt somewhat "flat" to me, and I was disappointed that one true detail that has fascinated a lot of people (Fermi throwing pieces of paper into the air to see how the blast wave affected them, and using this to come up with a reasonable estimate of the blast yield) didn't make it into the movie.
I see that of the major movie critics in America, Richard Brody in the New Yorker was about the only one who didn't like the film, pretty much on similar grounds that I've outlined:
Nolan cuts his scenes to fit together like a jigsaw puzzle, and details
that don’t fit—contradictions, subtleties, even little random
peculiarities—get left out, and, with them, the feeling of experience,
whether the protagonist’s or the viewer’s. What remains is a movie to be
solved rather than lived.
Brody adds some interesting detail about the real Oppenheimer in this section:
...the film is so intent on making Oppenheimer an icon of conflicted
conscience that it pays little attention to his character over all. He
was a renowned aesthete with a bearing so charismatic that his students
would try to emulate it, but we get little more than a couple of artsy
name-drops to suggest that he has any cultural life at all. The
“overweening ambition” that Groves saw in Oppenheimer is never in
evidence, nor is there any mention of his chilling readiness to go along
with a plan (one that was never put into action) to poison German food
supplies with radioactive strontium. There’s no glimpse of the ailing
Oppenheimer, who was suffering from tuberculosis and joint pain even
while running Los Alamos. It doesn’t help that Murphy portrays
Oppenheimer as wraithlike and haunted, a cipher, a black hole of
experience who bears his burdens blankly as he’s buffeted by his
circumstances but gives off no energy of his own. The performance, no less than the script, reduces the protagonist to an
abstraction created to be analyzed. “Oppenheimer” reveals itself to be,
in essence, a History Channel movie.
That very last line is probably unfair - there's no way a History Channel movie would make the telling so complicated and with visual flair - but in terms of how it deals with character, I get his point.
I'll wrap this up tomorrow...
Update:
* well, as far as I can tell, it's invented. I'm talking about the "Stauss introduces Oppenheimer to Einstein" scene. It is clear that the content of the conversation is invented - Oppenheimer had never asked Einstein to check if the bomb would set the atmosphere on fire - but it has been harder to find any site which explains specifically whether or not the meeting with Einstein (while Strauss watched) happened at all.
OK, to finish up a couple of things which provide some interesting context -
b. a pretty good Youtube video showing what modern day Los Alamos is like, including the slightly surprising detail about the way radioactive waste has been buried all around the place:
Update 2: I'm pleased to see there are quite a few people on Reddit prepared to criticise the film as being underwhelming for them, for similar reasons I outlined. I haven't even mentioned the oddball scene that was tweeted about (in response to someone who said "see, no one is talking about Oppenheimer any more") as follows:
Ha. :)
(Quite a few people think the female characters are a bit unfairly treated - there was a lot more to both of them than their flaws, which are pretty much the only aspect that make it into the story.)
Eggplants are very cheap at the moment, and I don't know why, but I seem to be enjoying them more and more lately, especially as baking them with a light oil coating has solved the "oil sponge" problem that used to be a bit a pain if frying them.
I made this curry last night, in which they are the key ingredient, and it came out very well. The technique was just to chop up a big eggplant into 2.5 cm cubes, coat in a bit of olive oil, salt and pepper and bake at about 200 degrees for 30 min.
The curry is made in the usual way - fry onion, add garlic and ginger, then the curry spices; add stock, tomatoes, chickpeas and coconut milk and simmer for 20 minutes. Add the baked eggplant and simmer another 10 minutes. Garam masala is supposed to go in at the end, but I forgot.
To stop link rot losing this, here are the ingredients:
1¼pound (20 ounces)eggplantabout 1 very large or two small (+ 1½ tbsp olive oil, ½ tsp salt, ¼ tsp black pepper for roasting)
1tablespoonolive oil
1mediumonionchopped
2 clovesgarlicgrated
1teaspoongingergrated
2teaspooncurry powder
1teaspooncuminseeds or ground
¼teaspoonred pepper flakes
1teaspoonturmeric powder
½teaspoonground coriander
½teaspoonblack pepper
1teaspoonsalt
2– 3 cupsvegetable brothbased on desired consistency
1can (15 ounces)chickpeasor 1½ cups of cooked chickpeas
1can (15 ounces)crushed tomatoes
1can (14 ounces)coconut milk
1teaspoongaram masala
Now, I did increase the curry powder to three teaspoons, and the red pepper flakes to about a teaspoon. Instead of a whole can of coconut milk I used about 2/3 one of coconut cream.
The eggplant was the only fresh ingredient I used, but it was still great. I guess I could try using fresh tomatoes next time, and perhaps add red capsicum too would be good.
The (rather dull, but harmless I guess) nerd Lex Fridman was all super excited earlier today about this:
My reaction, which only took about 5 seconds to occur to my sub-genius level brain: "Oh, so you mean, you experienced something exactly the same as a high quality video call, but using - what? - twenty times the computer power?? Big advance...."
But: I have scrolled quite a way down in the fanboy comments after this post, and still haven't found anyone making this point. Instead we get many variations on this:
Excuse the shouting, but:
HOW?? YOU CAN ALREADY DO THIS OVER VIDEO! IS NOT HAVING TO SHAVE OR COMB YOUR HAIR OR GET OUT OF YOUR PJ'S REALLY THAT BIG AN ADVANCE TO ONLINE MEETINGS?
Two somewhat surprising videos from Youtube today:
The first - I don't recall seeing this surprising ceremony from Madagascar before - where a huge number of people turn up to carry around the 7 year dead body of a beloved relative, in a very celebratory fashion. (Although one child in it finds it pretty upsetting).
And secondly - turns out that the bite of a spider in South America known as a "banana spider" was well known for causing priapism, and now the molecule derived from it is well on the way to being used in a ointment for erectile dysfunction (!):
Government ministers have spoken about the
voice’s potential to bring together advice on complex,
multi-disciplinary problems such as rheumatic heart disease, a
little-known condition that the health minister, Mark Butler, described as “a disease of grinding poverty, poor environmental conditions, and not something the health portfolio can manage alone”.
Pearson called it “a problem only a voice can overcome”.
“It is a disease of the unlistened to. It is the disease of a people who have spoken, but have not been heard,” he said.
“No gets us nowhere when it comes to confronting rheumatic heart disease. Yes makes it possible.”
A Google search shows in fact a plethora of articles in medical journals and websites discussing the problem. There are many recent articles, and to take one example from 2021:
And by refining the Google search, you can see how much the problem was discussed, say, a decade ago.
Here's a screenshot of the first page when the topic is restricted to 2010 to 2012 search results:
OK, so you might say "well, you are just proving that the problem was known, but the government wasn't listening to the aboriginal community about it."
The problem with that line is that Googling up the evidence of active government engagement to address the problem is also easy. For example, here's a 32 page booklet from the Queensland government n 2018 with the title:
Here's some material from the Federal government National Indigenous Australians Agency (not sure the date, but it's after 2018):
The National Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Health Plan 2021–2031 (the Health Plan),
released in December 2021, includes priority 5: Early Intervention;
which emphasises place-based approaches that are locally determined such
as preventing ARF from becoming RHD where needed, and promotes
enhancing access to culturally safe and responsive, best practice early
intervention (Objective 5.3). The Health Plan also supports community
driven housing and infrastructure solutions (Objective 7.2) to consider
targeted primordial intervention for housing-related medical conditions
that are common to Indigenous Australian households, such as ARF and
RHD, trachoma, and otitis media.
The Champions4Change Program has worked in partnership with RHD Australia
since 2018 to meet a clear need for an Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander-specific program that had self-determination and culture at its
heart. The program is supported by nearly 60 Indigenous Australians
with lived experience of ARF and RHD from 27 communities across
Australia. The program was designed to privilege and promote the voices
of its champions, to support them in their lives and work, and to put
culture, Country and community at the centre of responses to RHD.
Gee, the bit in bold sounds quite a lot like "listening" to me.
The Australian Government is committed to ending RHD as a public
health issue by 2030. To achieve this, the Australian Government is
making significant investments to address ARF and RHD through:
state-based register and control programs in the NT, WA, SA and
QLD, to improve detection, monitoring and management of ARF and RHD
developing clinical guidelines to prevent, diagnose and manage ARF and RHD
developing resources and providing education and training for
healthcare professionals, communities, and for individuals with these
conditions and their carers
piloting activities in high-risk communities to help prevent new cases of ARF
national analysis and reporting on the data from state-based registers.
I could go on.
The point is, of course, that Pearson is engaging in pure rhetorical hyperbole when he says this is one example of a problem that "only a voice can overcome" because the indigenous are not being "listened to".
The truth, which it really doesn't suit him to acknowledge, is that the problem has been well recognized for well over a decade, governments have been actively working on programs to deal with it, and have been engaging directly with aboriginal organisations and advocates.
There is really no reason to believe that having another layer of indigenous representatives who say "you're not doing enough!" is going to achieve anything better.
In science fiction, antiparticles provide
the power for warp drives. Some physicists have speculated that
antiparticles are being repelled by gravity or even traveling backward
in time.
A new experiment at CERN, the
European Center for Nuclear Research, brings some of that speculation
back down to Earth. In a gravitational field, it turns out,
antiparticles fall just like the rest of us. “The bottom line is that
there’s no free lunch, and we’re not going to be able to levitate using
antimatter,” said Joel Fajans of the University of California, Berkeley.
And:
Few physicists were surprised by the
result. According to Einstein’s theory of general relativity, all forms
of matter and energy respond equally to gravity.
“If
you walk down the halls of this department and ask the physicists, they
would all say that this result is not the least bit surprising,” Jonathan Wurtele,
a physicist at the University of California, Berkeley, said in an
announcement issued by the university. It was he who first suggested the
experiment to Dr. Fajans a decade ago. “That’s the reality,” Dr.
Wurtele said.
“But most of them will
also say that the experiment had to be done because you never can be
sure,” he added. “The opposite result would have had big implications.”
A bit of a pity, really. Anomalous results are more fun.
There's not much worth reading at Scientific American, I reckon, but I did enjoy this column about a recent meeting of science-y types debating panpsychism:
As it happens, I agree that the basic criticisms are pretty strong:
Some point out that it doesn’t explain how small bits of
consciousness come together to form more substantive conscious entities.
Detractors say that this puzzle, known as the “combination problem,”
amounts to panpsychism’s own version of the hard problem. The
combination problem “is the serious challenge for the panpsychist
position,” Goff admits. “And it’s where most of our energies are going.”
Others question panpsychism’s explanatory power. In his 2021 book Being You,
neuroscientist Anil Seth wrote that the main problems with panpsychism
are that “it doesn’t really explain anything and that it doesn’t lead to
testable hypotheses. It’s an easy get-out to the apparent mystery posed
by the hard problem.”
Perhaps I find these ideas more appealing:
Other ideas were batted around. The idea of cosmopsychism
was floated—roughly, the notion that the universe itself is conscious.
And Paul Draper, a philosopher at Purdue University who participated via
Zoom, talked about a subtly different idea known as “psychological ether theory”—essentially that brains don’t produce consciousness but rather make use of
consciousness. In this view, consciousness was already there before
brains existed, like an all-pervasive ether. If the idea is correct, he
writes, “then (in all likelihood) God exists.”
First, Dan Andrews resigns. The guy drove Right wingers absolutely nuts - maybe it was his air of general unflappability - but it was kind of funny reading some of the conspiracies spun about him. For my part, I don't generally spend much time thinking about politics at State level, and don't really have any strong opinion about Andrews as a person one way or another. But it's hard to deny that he has been electorally (perhaps culturally?) very successful, and a significant part of turning his State around from a Liberal stronghold to a Labor one.
Secondly: it's rare to read a news story of aberrant behaviour so appalling that it makes you feel queasy contemplating that there are people in the world who do this. But this is one of those stories.
I admit, I did google to learn some more background of the guy, who I hadn't heard of before. I thought maybe he was a damaged incel all his life, but no, he has (had?) a wife. No mention of children on line, though, which is undoubtedly a blessing, given that it is impossible to imagine how damaging it would be to learn this about your father.
I don't really know this person - seems to be a relatively centrist farmer and rural advocate? Seems to have put many tweets against the Voice on basically these grounds - lots of rural/remote Aboriginal people don't think a Canberra level Voice is actually the right way to get their concerns heard.
Given that I have noted at least three ABC stories where the reporter has talked to rural/remote Aboriginal groups and found this same distrust and lack of support for the Voice, it seems to be true, and something simply not addressed by the creators of the Uluru statement, who just insist that it was the result of years of consultation, etc.
I'm pretty sure Australia pioneered this mosquito control technique, and Singapore has taken it on board in a major way. Their mosquito breeding and release program is shown in this video from CNA, and it's more interesting than you might think.
Once again, Singapore looks so - competent - in the way they operate:
In a rare change for a Sunday night, I actually watched 60 Minutes because I saw on X Twitter that a major story about Pezzullo actively trying to influence Liberal Party internal politics was coming out.
The major online articles about it are behind a paywall (that'll change by the morning), so I only have this one to link to at the moment. It is a major scandal, and I can't see how Pezzullo could credibly last until the end of the week. He ought to fall on his sword by midday tomorrow - or perhaps I should say "metaphorical sword", because he strikes me as the sort of person who would have a real one in his office with a Home Affairs logo on it.
This lengthy article in The Guardian about a huge amount of infighting going on at Melbourne University on the issue of aboriginal studies and who gets appointed to positions would clearly be grounds for some good satirical fictionalised treatment. I'm casting my mind back to A Very Peculiar Practice, from the late 1980's, as the kind of thing I would like. (I wonder how that would play now, if I rewatched it; I do remember enjoying it at the time.) But the problem is, no one would be game to try this now. Not unless it was very, very sympathetic to the Aboriginal characters.
Dare I say, I don't have any doubt at all that there are many positions in indigenous academia which deserve to be cut. I mean, I read Sandy O'Sullivan's twitter feed just to aggravate myself, where I learn about all sort of esoteric talks and projects and overseas travel that are useful for keeping indigenous academics talking amongst themselves about how important their work is, rather than engaging with he rest of us, which is (I suppose) some sort of benefit to society. At what cost to more useful funding, though?
Here are some extracts:
The University of Melbourne
has come under fire for appointing non-Indigenous academics to senior
roles focused on Aboriginal studies, at the same time as acknowledging
it is “ill-equipped” to handle allegations of institutional racism.
The fresh criticism follows the resignation of Dr Eddie Cubillo
– a Larrakia, Wadjigan and Central Arrernte man – from his role as
part-time associate dean and senior fellow at the university’s
prestigious Melbourne Law School (MLS).
Cubillo
continues to lead the university’s Indigenous Law and Justice Hub but
alleged the law school was “the most culturally unsafe place” he’d
worked.
In
an email sent to staff last week, the deputy vice-chancellor
(Indigenous), Barry Judd, said Cubillo’s experiences showed current
processes were “ill-equipped” to deal with “the complex issues raised by
allegations of racism in the workplace”.
“As an organisation we have to do better,” he wrote.
And:
The Indigenous Knowledge Institute, founded in
late 2020 to advance Indigenous research and education, is headed by
Aaron Corn, who is a “long-term collaborator” with Indigenous leaders.
A
University of Melbourne (UoM) academic who wanted to remain anonymous
said the appointment of a non-Indigenous academic as the inaugural head
of a department wholly dedicated to Indigenous knowledge was “one of the
big catalysts” for the recent exits of First Nations staff.
“There was no shortage of [Indigenous] talent and it wasn’t a one-off,” they said.
Zena
Cumpston, a Barkandji woman and former research fellow at the
university, said it was common for non-Indigenous “experts” rather than
Indigenous academics to be placed in senior roles advising on community
and teaching Indigenous subjects.
Cumpston quit in August last year. She said she
experienced significant mental distress linked to her treatment at the
university and said she felt that anyone who spoke out against hiring
policies was “carved off as an individual problem”.
While
she was in the science faculty, Cumpston was asked to join its
Indigenous advisory body for no extra pay. She was shocked to find the
advisory panel was mostly comprised of non-Indigenous academics.
“Our
elders and communities have fought for these upper-level positions for
decades – the fundamental basics of self-determination – and here’s a
trend for positions with the word ‘Indigenous’ to be filled by
‘experts’, taking us back decades,” Cumpston said.
And:
Nic Radoll worked for seven months at the
University of Melbourne as its Indigenous engagement and outreach
coordinator before resigning late in 2022.
Radoll,
a non-binary and queer Anaiwan person, said it was the “worst
experience” of their career. They sent an email when resigning arguing
Indigenous staff were under-appreciated and subjects were labelled as
being “Indigenous-run” despite key decisions being made by
non-Indigenous staff.
“When I raised issues … I was told that I ‘don’t
exhibit any leadership qualities and will never go anywhere’ at the
university,” they said.
“I was told to ‘reduce
my expectations’ and that ‘it takes time to make change’ so I should
just do what I get told to do. It’s a killer for mental health.”
Nic is interviewed on this Youtube video. I feel mean in saying it, but yeah, "leadership qualities" are a bit hard to detect when you speak with that upwards inflection at the end of every second or third sentence.
Now, to be fair, it's not only this area of academia I would cut back if I were Benevolent Dictator of Australia.
RMIT's Blockchain Innovation Hub is the Right wing equivalent of Indigenous academia - keeps them off the street, developing arcane terminology with which to convince themselves it's a field worth pursuing, and (thankfully) off the TV or anywhere else.
Update: I note that Aaron Corn, who gets a mention in one of the extracts above, had a book out earlier this year co-authored with Marcia Langton. That would indicate that she doesn't have a big problem with his being appointed to head the Indigenous Knowledge Institute.
Update 2: Oh good. The professor is about to go on another junket, having just returned from a trip that took her to American and England:
I think watching a bit of breakfast TV, and also the commercial weekend news, gives a good idea of what the media thinks their audience is thinking. Or is it that the media is forming the thoughts that they think they are reflecting?
Anyway, some observations:
* Channel 7, which I generally prefer amongst the commercials for news and breakfast TV, has been running pretty hard on "youth crime crisis" for quite a while now. I worry in particular that it is going to be an election problem for Labor in Queensland;
* Channel 7 also has the most shameless undisclosed commercial interests going on - with the Saturday/Sunday "how the real estate market is going" segments, featuring one or two agents, and usually scenes at an auction, clearly not there because it's news. Also, the breakfast show this week have been promoting heavily Kylie Minogue's new album and Las Vegas shows - really quite a challenge, given that I can't see much of their typical audience is the ageing gay demographic that I think has been Minogue's "base" for a couple of decades.
* ABC Breakfast - which is OK-ish, but tends towards both being too earnest and spending too much time on sport, is doing its best to give the Voice Yes vote a push, this morning featuring Paul Kelly and that Adam Briggs. Briggs, who I find particularly annoying, was presenting himself as meek and moderate - pretty much the opposite of how he comes across on Twitter.
* I haven't been noticing all that much about the Voice on 7's breakfast TV. But I only see bits and pieces, usually. Both shows have segments that bore me.
* Both shows have been on the Qantas attack - it's the one issue that is pretty much uniting all sides of popular politics in Australia!
* I used to be most annoyed with 7's Breakfast when it gave a platform for normalising Pauline Hanson or other right wing nutters - and on the other side I blame them for creating Kevin Rudd as a plausible leader at a time people within Labor already knew he was going to be a terrible boss. Maybe I haven't been watching it in the right time slot, but I get the impression they are more careful now about who they let on to represent the Right, at least?
Coming to work is voluntary and the men are not bound by a roster.
On the day he spoke to the ABC, Mr Mungee is one of four workers who have turned up to sort and heat-seal firewood packages.
"When
I get up in the morning, when the people go past, that's when I ask
some of the young fellas: 'Come, you want to work?', but they don't want
to come for work," he said.
"They're sitting and getting Centrelink money. They will only work when they see people working."
As with many other remote communities, unemployment has long been one of Yalata's biggest issues.
While
nationally, Australian Bureau of Statistics data shows unemployment is
at near record lows, 2021 Census data shows First Nations Australians
are still more than three times as likely to be out-of-work than
non-Indigenous people.
The
Australian Institute for Health and Welfare states the employment rate
for Indigenous Australians in remote areas is about half that in major
cities.
In Yalata, there are 66 jobs for approximately 425 residents.
That's up from 19 positions three years ago.
In other words, there's only jobs for 15 per cent of locals.
While they are trying to put a positive spin on the increase in job numbers, it's still a surprisingly honest report. More:
Locals say cultural considerations
and changes to the Community Development Program (CDP), which required
some people in remote areas to work a set number of hours to receive
Centrelink payments, have contributed to the community's relatively low
employment rate.
They say alcohol and drug misuse remain a problem, and not everyone regularly turns up to work.
The
issues are indicative of the plight of the Aṉangu, who were displaced
from their ancestral lands around Maralinga in South Australia's remote
west in the 1950s to make way for a British atomic weapons testing
range.
The community split between Ooldea and Yalata, with some families taking ownership of the Yalata Reserve in 1974.
While displacement from Maralinga may have created some problems, I doubt that there is any more economic activity possible in that old site compared to their current location.
The article does mention some of their "farming land" and running sheep - but gee, the photos in the article make it look like far from ideal land for that.
The boss out there tries to put some positive spin:
"There's some misinformation about
Aboriginal communities, how they're fully supported by government
handouts and things like that," Yalata Aṉangu Aboriginal Corporation
CEO, David White, said.
"We're
trying to destroy that myth and say: 'Yeah, we've had some handouts to
try and get us off the ground, but we're trying to get off the ground
ourselves'.
There's a long way to go, obviously.
Anyhow, of most interest to me was this bit at the end of the article:
The value of self-determination has been a key theme of the Yes campaign
in the lead up to the Voice to Parliament referendum, with supporters
of the proposed constitutional change hoping it would ensure
decision-makers take note of what can be achieved when change is driven
from within.
The ABC approached dozens of
Yalata locals to ask what they thought about the proposed Voice, but
only one – elder Bruce Williamson – was happy to share his views.
Other locals were unaware of the Voice or were reluctant to speak out.
"We put stories to the government, to Canberra, to help us. Help people," Mr Williamson said.
"We ask the government from Canberra to put something good for us."
That's it! It's not even clear from that that Bruce Williamson supports the Voice, or understands it.
So, yet again, the ABC is doing a good job at illustrating that the activists who are promoting the Voice have done a pretty poor job of convincing locals that it's really in their interests.
An
Indonesian court has sentenced a woman to two years in jail for posting
a viral TikTok video where she said an Islamic phrase before eating
pork.
Lina Lutfiawati, 33, was found guilty of "inciting hatred" against religious individuals and groups.
She also faces a $16,245 (£13,155) fine. Her jail term may be extended by three months if she does not pay up.
It is the latest in a series of cases involving controversial blasphemy laws in Muslim-majority Indonesia.
Lina
Lutfiawati, who adopted the Indian name Lina Mukherjee due to her love
of Bollywood movies, identifies as Muslim. The consumption of pork is
strictly forbidden in Islam.
The lifestyle influencer, who has more than two million TikTok followers, also runs a business in India.
In
March, she posted a video where she uttered "Bismillah" - an Arabic
phrase that means "in the name of God" - before eating crispy pork skin.
At
the time, she was travelling in Bali, a tourist hotspot in Indonesia
that, unlike the rest of the country, has a majority Hindu population.
Ms Lutfiawati said she tried pork out of curiosity.
The
video got millions of views and was widely criticised, prompting
another Indonesian to report her to the police for "knowingly eating
pork skin as a Muslim".
Police
charged Ms Lutfiawati in May for disseminating hateful information,
saying it was an act of hostility over ethnicity, religion, and race.
How is it an "act of hostility", exactly?
Similarly, this:
Indonesian police last year arrested six people after a bar promoted
free alcohol - prohibited in Islam - for customers named Mohammed.
%20Gavin%20Schmidt%20(@ClimateOfGavin)%20_%20X.png)
%20Lex%20Fridman%20(@lexfridman)%20_%20X.png)
%20panpsychism%20-%20Search%20_%20X.png)
%20Mal%20Peters%20(@peters_malcolm)%20_%20X.png)
%20Home%20_%20X.png)
%20Home%20_%20X.png)
%20Prof%20Sandy%20O'Sullivan%20(Wiradjuri%20trans%20they_them)%20(@sandyosullivan)%20_%20X.png){kind=spacer}
%20Home%20_%20X.png)
%20Charlie%20Pickering%20(@charliepick)%20_%20X.png)