Today I experienced what it was like to disagree on a (semi) public forum with “mainstream” Australians. Lesson learnt: It is still completely unacceptable to even try and question the myth of the ANZAC, Mateship, what it is to ‘be’ an Australian and our right to be here, living under the lie of terra nullius: Australia Day.The Australia Day Council’s official website (http://www.australiaday.org.au/experience/page31.asp) states,
“Australia Day, 26 January, is the anniversary of the arrival of the First Fleet of 11 convict ships from Great Britain, and the raising of the Union Jack at Sydney Cove by its commander Captain Arthur Phillip, in 1788.”
So to be clear for those who are unfamiliar with our shining record of colonisation (and I say this seriously as, after what I experienced today, I believe many are unclear) this very day is the beginning of a new Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander reality. The lie of terra nullius (it should be noted that there is no mention of terra nullius being declared or overturned on the timeline provided on the official website) that was in place until overturned in 3 June 1992, begins to provide the infrastructure for a regime of discrimination, violence, apartheid and eventual attempts at assimilation. Today we are meant to be in a phase of reconciliation.
“On Australia Day we recognise the unique status of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. The Australia Day National Network is committed to playing a part in the journey of reconciliation through helping all Australians move forward with a better understanding of the past and how it affects the lives of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people today.” (http://www.australiaday.org.au/experience/page78.asp)
So I woke up prepared to think about “…the past and how it affects the lives of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people today.”
The day began like any other – quick check on facebook and throwing up a status update. “Invasion Day. Call it what it is people.”
Well apparently this was also a call to arms to any of my connections who feel today really does celebrate and embrace all that they believe is Australian. I was also surprised at how limited this definition was.
Julia - "Dislike Thomas, just let us enjoy another public holiday & wear tacky crap & eat meat & drink beer & blow fireworks up. You wouldn't dare say that out loud in The Shire!"
Apparently I should also not say it online!
Michael #1 - "Im disgusted that so many people have fought and died to make this country what it is so you can voice those opinions and you spit on it with comments like that. Maybe you'd be happier renouncing your citizenship."
Michael #2 - "Sorry for what? What did i do! If i want to celebrate Australia, yes Australia, i will! Its not anyone else fault that you associate it with White man fucking it for everyone else. Should i be ashamed of having white skin too. And what the fuck has Nationalism got to do with it! Its a free country, if you dont like it go else where unlike what you cant do in a lot of places in the world. If you dont want to celebrate australia day dont, it your choice, or even better have your own celebration on how you see fit instead of bitching about everyone else enjoying the day and being so disgusted in everyone for not thinking like yourself. Sorry we are not as "enlightened" as you guys and your educted point of view............................."
Craig - "I think our country's dirty laundry has been well aired Kath. I for one am proud of this great nation we live in. I feel blessed to be here, not ashamed. Find me a single place on earth that doesn't have something bad in it's past. Today is a day of celebration, not sorrow and shame and soapboxes. If you are so upset to be one of us, you can renounce your citizenship for a small fee. The forms are online. "
Jon - "Can I "like" Craigs last comment twice? Or would the double "like" create a rift in the Facebook-time continuum?"
Craig - "Surround yourself with unemployed freaks from Newtown all you like, but never defame the Anzac name or tradition when you have never fought for a thing in your life, and been handed most. They are much better and braver men and women than either you or I. How dare you? You hide behind political correctness, but refuse debate. Deplorable. If your views are so correct, why do you fear why I have to say?"
So to be clear again – because I do not agree with the traditional idea of “Australia Day”, and instead feel that the ATSI community really do have a case for this day representing a celebration of the invasion of their country, culture and lives, I am personally now being accused of ‘bitching’, ‘airing dirty laundry’, asked to rethink my citizenship, and labelled as being insensitive to all those soldiers who fought and died for our country.
Un-Australian?
Sorry?
The Australia Day Council claims:
“On Australia Day we recognise the unique status of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. The Australia Day National Network is committed to playing a part in the journey of reconciliation through helping all Australians move forward with a better understanding of the past and how it affects the lives of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people today.” (http://www.australiaday.org.au/experience/page78.asp)
If my own facebook experience today is anything to go by, I’m feeling like there is not quite enough being done to achieve this.
Well Kathleen, I hope it makes you feel better to block all the people that disagree with anything you say and have a good bitch to all the people that agree with you, But unfortunately for you I found this one too. First of all, what happened to our "private" conversation which is now shared on your blog? you were so adamant about all of that not being a public forum so I'm a little annoyed as to why you would quote my comments without at least adding your very narrow minded, one sided replies?
ReplyDeleteSecondly, Do you enjoy alienating yourself from your Dysfunctional (yeah I still remember that sms from years ago) family or does it just seem to go that way for you? well I'm going to save you the hassle of your shallow attempts of having to associate with me and just cut it loose now so thanks for the save the date email but I'm sorry to say I think I'm busy that weekend (probably some anti-rights meeting to go to).
Lastly, No need to block everyone else for comments I've made. If you don't like it and want to say something don't hide behind the internet with people who will back you up, contact me and talk in person.
I'm assuming that you probably won't talk to me again so good luck with everything, stay safe, and enjoy the family that still talks to you (before they say something you don't like and you delete them too).
Love Michael.
Well ladies and gentlemen. Who said politics isn't personal! An interesting comment. I am going to ponder it in light of a statement made by Foucault:
ReplyDelete"In the serious play of questions and answers, in the work of reciprocal elucidation, the rights of each person are in some sense immanent in the discussion. They depend only on the dialogue situation. The person asking the questions is merely exercising the right that has been given him: to remain unconvinced, to perceive a contradiction, to require more information, to emphasize different postulates, to point out faulty reasoning, and so on. As for the person answering the questions, he
too exercises a right that does not go beyond the discussion itself; by the logic of his own discourse, he is tied to what he has said earlier, and by the acceptance of dialogue he is tied to the questioning of other.
Questions and answers depend on a game—a game that is at once pleasant and difficult—in which each of the two partners takes pains to use only the rights given him by the other and by the accepted form of dialogue.
The polemicist , on the other hand, proceeds encased in privileges that he possesses in advance and will never agree to question. On principle, he possesses rights authorizing him to wage war and making that struggle a just undertaking; the person he confronts is not a partner in search for the truth but an adversary, an enemy who is wrong, who is armful, and whose very existence constitutes a threat. For him, then the game consists not of recognizing this person as a subject having
the right to speak but of abolishing him as interlocutor, from any possible dialogue; and his final objective will be not to come as close as possible to a difficult truth but to bring about the triumph of the just cause he has been manifestly upholding from the beginning. The polemicist relies on a legitimacy that his adversary is by definition denied."
Something for everyone in this scenario to think about.
Foucault, Michel (1997), Polemics, Politics, and Problematizations.’ In Paul Rabinow (Ed.) The Essential Works of Michel Foucault Vol. I. Ethics: Subjectivity and Truth., ed. Paul Rabinow, trans. Lydia Davis; New York: The New Press.
OMG what kind of person have you become i grew up with you all my life and if i remember correctly it was you who hated aboriginal people and yes that is very true everyone i now no longer have contact with this person who is unfourtunatly my sister as she is pretending to be someone she is not she hates aboriginal people she grew up in housing commision and even changed her last name from kathleen staggs to kathleen thomas as she was embaressed by her family.10 years ago i gave birth to my daughter whom she refused to hold on the acooubt of her looking like an aboriginal and has never seen my children since this woman is a fake and the world deserves to know
ReplyDeleteHello, I enjoy reading through your post. I wanted to write a little comment to support you.
ReplyDeleteI believe that is among the most significant information for me. And i am satisfied reading your article. But wanna statement on few common issues, The website taste is perfect, the articles is truly nice : D. Good activity, cheers
ReplyDelete