Letters to the Editor
-
still up to his old tricks
Howard might appear to be backpedaling on his former inflamatory comments regarding Asian immigration, but continues to enact policies trying to limit long-term immigration, especially that for refugees.
Recently his minister for immigration made several racist remarks about the inability of Sudanese refugees to integrate into the community (you see, can't pick on the Asians anymore, better pick on the Africans) as well as blaming them for being violent and forming gangs (ironically a few days after he made these statements a Sudanese youth was bashed to death by a group of caucasains. the minister and Howard by proxy refused to apologise or even admit that their comments may have fueled the attack).
In the past year the Howard government also instituted a citizenship test (prior to this citizenship was granted to any permanent resident who fit the character requirements and who had lived in Australia for the requisite time peroid). The test is ONLY administered in ENGLISH. What a great way to prevent those pesky Asians from voting! Deny them citizenship based on their somewhat patchy English (which does not of course reflect their intellegence or adherence to Australian values... but rather how well they can understand the questions on the test).
Less recently we can reflect on the Prime Minister's enlightening comments re the Cornulla Riots. In the riots, people who appeared to be of muslim decent (ie anyone the least bit middle eastern or hell, even medditerranian looking) was attacked by a mob of white, flag-waving hoons. The Prime Minister denied the riots showed that Australia had a problem with race.
What a crazy country this is. Being an American in Australia has really opened my eyes to how blind we can all be about our own country's flaws. I have friends here who are totally intellegent, caring people who will come out with statements about Asians, refugees and (the biggest of them all) Aboriginals that simply boggle my mind. I honestly believe that it IS part of the national value system here to be a tiny bit racist. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.
-
It's more than just racism ... He's Bush's Boy !
Howard has set Austrailia back in many ways , just as has Bush in America.
The gap between rich and poor is widening and the middle class is under pressure. His environmental stands are unpopular.
Howard's got a lot going for him ... retirement!
-
Bye Bye Johnny
The imminent demise of the Howard govt is a cause of immense joy for many Australians. I live and vote in his electorate (though I'm not an Asian-Australian) and am truly looking forward to voting against him on the 24th.
As an interesting tangent, Rudd has committed to withdrawing all Australia's combat troops from Iraq by mid-08. The US is about to lose another Iraq ally it seems.
On the broader issue of racism, I don't believe that Australia is more or less racist than any other comparable country. There is plenty of racism sure, but that's sadly the case everywhere. To say that Australia is a racist country because of John Howard is like saying that the USA is an inarticulate, fundamentalist Christian, warmongering nation because of George Bush. Simplistic and wrong, in other words. The big picture is that Australia is, like the US, a successful multicultural society which, despite undeniable problems, has a low level of racial tension overall.
-
@ Andrew Burke
“To say that Australia is a racist country because of John Howard is like saying that the USA is an inarticulate, fundamentalist Christian, warmongering nation because of George Bush.”
Once one leaves the coasts, that is quite an accurate description of the USA. According to pollingreport.com, sixty percent of Yanks think the story of Noah’s Ark is literally true. Our warmongering is a matter of history and I would address the inarticulate part of the quote, but there are too many syllables for me to understand the word.
Seriously, can any reasonable person deny the racism in Australia (or the USA)?
-
Agreed
No, no reasonable person can deny the racism in either country. I agree.
My point was only that it's problematic to generalise about a whole society. Australia has many racist people and many people who abhor racism. The US has the same. There is both good and bad in all of us, and it's our responsibility to ensure that the good wins more often than the bad. Which explains why I'm voting against John Howard on Saturday week.
-
There are many Australias, not just one
What is happening in Australia is that the dominant, Anglo-Saxon or Anglo-Celtic minority, who rule, and dominate our institutions, want to keep on having that privilege. Asians, Africans, Arabs, and 'people of middle Eastern appearance'-- a very telling phrase-- however, threaten their image of Australia as white and European (a byproduct of British colonization), because they don't look like the dominant class. As few and few white Anglo-Saxons and Europeans are giving birth, the more the dominant class begins to decry that 'we' (meaning 'they') will perish if we don't reproduce (hence the baby bonus). Or, they hysterically whine that Australia is being 'swamped' by "illegal immigrants" (that is, refugees)who will drain the public purse (which resembles the racist rhetoric of Nativists in the USA). That is, are being swamped by people who don't look like (or behave, or think) like us (meaning them: the dominate class). You see, Australian identity has always been defined around our idea of the nation; and those doing the defining have been elites trying to persuade us that their definition is the right one. For instance, the nationalism of the 1890s was actually the way the colonials tried to distinguish themselves from the British, or old country.
John Howard, however, prefers to focus on 'our' British past; 'our' common ancestors', which makes no sense to most Australians. Can you imagine Americans celebrating having once been colonists, British subjects? But that's what little Johnnie expects us Australians to do because it gives the Anglo-Saxon (those of British descent) rulers their legitimacy. That's why he is on a mission to have a new curriculum which gives priority to 'Australian history' -- which is just the social studies of old where we were regaled with stories about the first fleet, Captain Cook's discovery of Australia, the pioneers and no mention of Aborigines implemented in schools (a history, that is, of white imperialism). That he wants to go back to the days of the White Australia policy is pretty obvious, except of course to fellow racists. The Cronulla riot, as such, must be seen within this context. From the time Howard was first elected, multiculturalism was continually denounced (along with 'the welfare state') because it ran counter to their image of Australia as white, Christian, Anglo-Saxon and European rather than as democratic and pluralistic (or egalitarian; a nation of the 'fair go': Old Labor's defintion). It was a tool by which to politically mobilize subject groups within the nation of different classes to side with the dominant class, who pretended to represent their interests. By referring to 'Australian' values, and what makes 'us' a nation' Howard could convince umemployed white youth, working class tradesmen, the middle class, yobbos, and white suburbanites that they shared common goals and should resist anyone not conforming to these goals. Instead of seeing they had more in common with Lebanese youth than they did with multi-millionaires like John Laws or Rupert Murdoch, they instead swallowed Howard's racist rhetoric of there being one nation, one Australia (white Australia). The white rioters waved Australian flags, totally unaware of the British union Jack and its history. The rioters of the Eureka stockade would have rolled in their graves. This riot, incidentally, was a one-off, and the culmination of years of the Liberal-Coalition and John Howard, and Sydney shock radio jocks, demonising Muslims and the Lebanese (who are thought to always be Muslims, when in fact, some are Christians; no surprise that racists often miss such subtleties). Neo-Liberal (so-called free market policies) had made Australians worse off, so it was no surprise that the ignorant and bigoted amongst Australians would search for a scapegoat. Envy of welfare recipients and immigrants receiving benefits, or anyone who differed from the stereotypical Australian, grew because the Murdoch press and mainstream conservative media and its moguls fanned it to deflect from what was really happening. The wealthy were transferring wealth from labour to capital (or from wages to profit), and as a result fewer and fewer resources were being allocated to the rest. So it's no surprise they began to fight each other, and resented anyone they thought was getting something without working for it. This is what laissez-faire causes.