Aboriginal Privilege

I've always wondered, without actually wanting to find out, what it would be like to live in an authoritarian dystopia. Well, we're finding out now. Shit's getting more and more bizarre every day, from the Prime Minister whining that the national broadcaster is being mean to him, to that unfortunate business of violating Indonesia's borders whilst "protecting" our own. And just to put the ridiculous cherry on the ridiculous sundae, yesterday suave right wing lunatic about town Andrew Bolt - with no Aboriginal heritage as far as I know - proclaimed that since his family has been here for several generations, he is, in fact, indigenous.

Now, whilst everyone in the country with an IQ above room temperature blinked in amused disbelief, I began wondering what's really going on here. Even Bolt couldn't believe this rubbish, surely. I imagined a long, boozy lunch in Melbourne sometime over the Christmas break, with Peta Credlin explaining "we're in big trouble here. Just make Abbott look like a moderate", and Bolt bowing slightly at a framed portrait of Murdoch on the table, intoning "his will be done" before heading off to pen a column calling Abbott a leftist.

Sheesh.

Anyway, in amongst the comments on Bolt's post calling him out as the buffoon he is were plenty of supporters agreeing with him. Apparently being Australian isn't enough for these people - they want to be indigenous too! And they're sick, thoroughly sick they tell you, of all the special privileges they believe Aboriginal people have. Any bad stuff that happened to them was 200 years ago. It's time they got over it.

It was not 200 years ago. It was not. This is why we need Aboriginal studies to be a compulsory subject in school. But I'm not sure if even that would be enough. Since racists are people who don't care what's happening if it's not happening to them, their family and friends, I'd like to explain this to them in terms they would understand. I'd like to sit down with each of these people and say:

"Imagine this. One night, I break into your house and kill you. I take your house and everything that's in it; it's all mine now. I send your children away to a group home hundreds of kilometres away where they are told to forget their family, not allowed to speak English and forced to communicate in a foreign language, used as slave labour, beaten, exposed to religious indoctrination in a faith not their own, and possibly sexually abused. Then at the age of 15 or 16, they are tossed out onto the street with no skills, no money and no support. They can't go home - there's no home to go to; you've been murdered and I've taken your house. Your children are left to as best they can make a life for themselves in an alien culture with no skills to survive. Imagine then, when your children have children of their own, imagine how it will be for your grandchild, growing up with parents struggling to survive, alienated from their culture, traditions, language, and quite possibly suffering from post traumatic stress disorder after seeing their parents murdered and all they experienced since. Think what sort of a life your grandchild will have.

"Now imagine your grandchild sees my grandchild living off the proceeds inherited from my taking your property. My grandchild has grown up in their own culture, with their own community and family heritage intact, and has gotten wealthy from investing your property. Imagine your grandchild asks my grandchild for some form of compensation. And my grandchild says no. That he shouldn't be made to feel guilty for what I did before he was even born. It was a long time ago. Your grandchild needs to get over it.

 "Because that's exactly how Aboriginal people have been treated in this country and exactly what you are saying to them now."

I bet they still wouldn't get it though, the bastards.

Leave a Comment

What Happened To The Green and Gold?

Those of us old enough to remember the Bicentennial in 1988 may remember, tucked in amongst the tall ships and flyovers and national backslapping, seeing Aboriginal people protest on the streets. I asked my father what they were protesting, and he repeated whatever Alan Jones and John Laws were saying about it. I really couldn't understand. It was a big party. Other countries were giving us presents. There was going to be fireworks. Fireworks! Why couldn't they just be happy?

I've grown up since then, well enough to realise that for Aboriginal people, what is referred to as "Australia Day" represents the loss of their millennia-old culture, laws, traditions, way of life; the genocide (I can't put it any more mildly for that would be a lie) that began the day a few creaky ships bearing the dregs of British society invaded their nation. I've grown up, and decent people have grown up, but large numbers of Australians haven't, refusing to recognise history, applying their racist filter to the events which shaped the Australian nation. In fact, it's getting worse. Those of us who can remember the Bicentennial will remember it was celebrated in shades of the national colours, green and gold; these are now barely to be seen, replaced by the overwhelming pervasiveness of the flag. Somewhere in between Australia Day has gone from an insensitive and cheesy display of national pride to a violent and scary flag-draped triumph of jingoism.

Not an improvement

Somewhere along the lway, under the "Fortress Australia" mentality of the Howard government, Australia Day became a thuggish, politicised display of unthinking loyalty and racism. But even as figures are released showing Australia Day is the most violent public holiday, companies are rushing to appeal to the racist bogan market. You can if you choose show your national allegiance by wrapping your drunk sweaty body in the flag, farting through Australian flag boardshorts and letting your kid crap on Australian flag nappies. Even that's not enough for some, with several major retailers releasing apparel reading "AUSTRALIA EST. 1788". The companies in question were quick to pull the items after a social media backlash, but some rushed to defend the items, claiming that the companies were caving to the demands of political correctness. But it's not political incorrectness we have a problem with, it's historical inaccuracy.

There is zero historical basis for saying that Australia was established as a nation in 1788. That happened on January 1, 1901. The colony of NSW was formed as a penal settlement in 1788, it's true - and based on the historical fiction of terra nullius, that the land was unoccupied, it's original inhabitants deemed less than human. Using this to claim Australia was founded in 1788 is a stretch of truth so far as to give one whiplash. Now, this is all a bit much for your average keyboard warrior posting racist invectives on Facebook to comprehend, but what if the ignorance originates higher up?

Dumped Katter's Australia party candidate, former Army intelligence (ahem) officer and homophobe-about-town Bernard Gaynor claims in his latest blog post that at the Australian Defence Force Academy in 2000, a lecturer in Australian Colonial Studies instructed these future leaders of the Australian Defence Forces that Aboriginal Australians had no civilisation prior to colonisation. If true, this is absolutely appalling. Why would a lecturer at the country's elite military academy, aligned with UNSW, one of our top educational institutions, get away with saying such incorrect rubbish? We often hear the right carry on about "their taxes" paying for this and that. Well, I wonder how Aboriginal Australians feel about their taxes paying for the military to spout such nonsense?

Because it's not politically incorrect - it's just wrong. You know, like we were taught as children, right and wrong. Prior to 1788, Aboriginal society was incredibly diverse and complex. There were complex systems of law and trade; concepts of mathematics; kinship, spirituality, an understanding of the land, how to manage it and how to revere it; many language families and relations between language groups; and extensive oral histories passing all this down. This was the civilisation that was largely destroyed upon colonisation, a civilisation which, if you hold the untruth that Australia was established in 1788, you must deny the existence of.

There's much talk in the national media at the moment about what should be included in the national curriculum, with many espousing greater teaching of Australia's Christian heritage. Perhaps, but we can't begin to understand where we come from as a people - let alone being to redress the wrongs of the past - without ensuring every Australian schoolchild learns Aboriginal studies; learns of the incredible society and civilisation of Aboriginal Australians and the devastating effect of colonisation. This is not "pre-history", it's just our history. For those who've finished school, it's not too late to learn. As a starting point, I recommend the excellent books by Richard Broome, who as well as imparting the history, gives a very real sense of the horror the Cadigal people must have felt on seeing the invading ships arrive and destroy their way of life. There are many excellent writers and activists we can learn of Aboriginal Australia from - such as The Koori Woman, 1 Deadly Nation, and Start Some Good. Follow the curated account Indigenous X on Twitter. Remember Warren Mundine does not speak for all Aboriginal people and neither does anyone else (I'm not claiming to speak for them at all, not being Aboriginal myself). Learn a little. Fixing the ignorance about the flag and Australia day won't solve the problems of Aboriginal Australia, but the "Est. 1788" t-shirts are symptomatic of a nation that can't even be bothered to try.

3 comments

Drunken Violence And The Truth About The Newcastle Solution

It was impossible to avoid a sick, horrified feeling, "oh no, not again". Another young man fighting for his life after a random, unprovoked attack in the street from a drunken maggot on a night out. As Daniel Christie lies in a coma after heading out on his first New Year's Eve alone with friends, everyone is desperately hoping for a solution...and the "Newcastle Solution" is the one that's often raised. Since 2008, alcohol sales are restricted after 10pm, patrons cannot enter venues after 1:30am and everything shuts at 3am - leading to a 37% reduction in alcohol related assaults. It looks great, at first glance. Trying this is suggested for Sydney, to reduce the violence. But would it work?

 In the first place, it's worth noting that the intention of the Newcastle solution was never to reduce alcohol-related violence. In the early 2000s, as part of the urban renewal, large blocks of luxury apartments were built in the Newcastle CBD; these were especially popular with downsizing retirees and baby boomers. But having moved into town to be close to the action, they found the action was a lot noisier than they thought. There's very little suburban nightlife in Newcastle; everyone goes into town, pouring in from the lake, the valley, the suburbs. And it made a lot of noise, and the elderly residents didn't like it, and began agitating for a curfew at least as early as 2002; I wrote a letter to the Newcastle Herald at the time saying what a dreadful idea it was. I was in my early twenties then, and went out a lot, and saw very little violence and nearly always felt safe. The residents didn't care; they formed an action group, and kept lobbying and lobbying, and finally got their way in 2008. The official reasoning for the lockout system was that the hotel patrons were causing "undue disturbance to the quiet and good order of the neighbourhood" - not about the violence.

On paper, it worked to reduce violence; the 37% reduction in assaults we keep hearing about. But it is important to note that this is in the Newcastle CBD only. Locked out of bars and pubs, people increasingly attend suburban house parties - what are the statistics on assaults there? They're unregulated, unpatrolled, more likely to lead to drunk driving as the mediocre public transport from the Newcastle CBD is replaced by none at all in the suburbs. There is also the inevitable economic losses - the impact on businesses that trade in alcohol has been huge, and has lead to a lot of job losses, particularly among students and young people who heavily engage in bar work.

It's also worth noting that a curfew wouldn't have helped Daniel Christie or Thomas Kelly, who died after a single unprovoked punch in July 2012. Mr Christie was attacked at 9pm and Mr Kelly at 10pm by fetid pieces of distended monkey rectum who had begun drinking earlier in the day. They were both attacked at a time when most people are only starting to go out, long before any curfew would begin. How would a curfew work in an international city like Sydney, anyway? Tourists get here and can't get into a club after 1am? Would they kick everyone out of the casino for a bit? (That, I'd be okay with). What happens during Mardi Gras?

If a curfew would work, I'd be all for it. But I just can't see it - people have been drinking till dawn for years, and this culture of attacks is a recent thing. I don't know what's causing it - Alan Jones? But rushing in a band aid solution won't stop this. I wish something would.

Leave a Comment