When I was two and a half my parents sat me down and gave me the facts of life. A man in a funny hat had perhaps got a little tired and emotional at the Melbourne races, decided to take matters into his own hands and turfed the government. Remember this day, they said, there will never be another one like it.
When I was thirty-two my parents gave me the full story.
The overwhelming feeling was that of disbelief. How could this happen? How could the goverment be dislodged so easily? What was this, some South American country where the leader could be dismissed so easily? A, whisper it, banana republic?
Mum can’t remember where she was. Probably at home with the two kids she had had by that stage (she ended up having five). Dad was (and still is) a teacher. He remembers a “pinko lefty” year 9 kid running up to him at the canteen at lunch time and telling him what had happened. The kid was almost in tears. How many year 9 kids today would be able to name the PM…
They knew it could happen, theoretically. The knew the Queen’s rep had done it but they also knew the Queen wouldn’t have the balls to do it in the UK. There Gough was on the stairs, giving his famous ‘God save…’ speech and Mum was sitting there, hoping, god, please, that he had something. Something to get this little bastard. He had nothing though. Nothing he could use.
The blocking of supply had alerted them to something awry. No one had done this before. It was possible, legally, but it was just not done. Not cricket. UnAustralian. But there they were, doing it. It couldn’t possibly get much worse. But it did.
When Gough had been elected it felt like it was ‘time’. They’d been out in the wilderness for so long. That campaign was inspired. We’ve had enough of them, time to give the other bloke a go. But then Gough got in and he had this vision. He had a sense of the big picture. Gough was uni educated and he wasn’t afraid of talking about it. But he also had a sense of panic borne of 30 years in the dark, talking with no one listening. So he pushed stuff hard. Stuff people wouldn’t always agree with. Like the arts. Giving money to people dancing and painting pictures (Blue Poles anyone?). Seems very reasonable to some of us but a lot of people were asking what the hell he was doing.
He scared people. Maybe he was acting above what should be his station, as an Australian. We don’t talk about stuff like that, you know, education and painting and shit.
Anyway, Gough was made to go on his merry way, Fraser was elected with a landslide. Obviously the GG had a few people on his side, or Gough scared the crap out of people.
Looking around today you would think it is the latter and nothing has changed. It’s still not done to talk of large visions and big pictures. The Howard Government used Gough’s tutelage as a weapon against Latham. Keating was seen as too elite by his Bankstown kin, too crass by the educated. Labor continues to tread a fine line between intellect and blue collar, resonating with neither. Meanwhile, Howard and his ilk tell us how much they have advanced this country while discouraging higher education, preferring that the young are cannon fodder for industry.
So if it was all so… unAustralian and unfair - why is it that the great majority of Australians took the opportunity to reject Whitlam in December 75 and again in 77? Fraser was by no means a towering figure in any other than a literal sense, but the if this was such a massive injustice, why is it that only a rump of the party was so outraged?
The blocking of supply was seen as poor form. Maybe for the simple reason that it had never been done before. The point of my post was that in the end it was Gough that was seen as unAustralian. The large victories of Fraser and the continuing choice of the current Coalition could be seen as pointing to a rejection by ‘Australia’ of the things associated with Gough.
Good stuff Georg - enjoyed that. In response to this anecdote:
“He remembers a “pinko lefty” year 9 kid running up to him at the canteen at lunch time and telling him what had happened. The kid was almost in tears. How many year 9 kids today would be able to name the PM…”
I think the majority of Year 9 kids would definitely be able to name the PM, but I don’t think a single one today would be tearful if Howard was turfed out of office. The Prime Minister today is just there, and that is all. Vision is apparently overrated.
Gosh, I’m feeling old today when I read all the LP posters who were two at the time. I was 19. I wore a black armband for the week after the dismissal and went on demonstrations. I worked at a voting booth on the election day and was terribly dejected when Fraser won. I had grown up under Menzies and it took not much thought to see that the conservative forces in this country felt they were entitled to rule and that was their main gripe against Whitlam.
Naomi - thanks for backing me up wth some actual research…
Glad you enjoyed it Guy. As my first post on LP I was a little nervous! I think you’re right about the Year 9 kids today. They know the Government exists but it doesn’t particularly bother them. If my Dad is reading this he may like to shed some more light on the political state of today’s teenagers.
Susoz - don’t worry about age, on the internet we’re all the same.
Yes - nice work, Georg!
Great post, Georg. I think you’re on the right track by mentioning stuff like Blue Poles. Although I’m close to the same age as you so really I haven’t any personal experience other than having had young parents (23 and 25 in 1975) who took of for granted a great deal of the new ideology, though not all of it.
I read the other day that Jim Cairns invented Confest. No wonder these people freaked everyone out. After 23 years of Libs too. It’s hard to imagine.
Compared to the 13-18 year olds 30 years ago, generlly, today’s kids have little idea what’s happening outside American sit-coms, “reality” TV. What they do know tends to come from the Daily Telegcrap/graph and A Current Affair.
There is little interest in serious current events, it’s all too boring, and as for political events, get real.
The naivety of most high school students reflects their backgound. Most parents don’t give a rodent’s rectum about the “big picture” so why would their kids be any different?
Despite the mandatory study of History in junior secondary schools in NSW, it’s only when the chosen few select the Histories in senior secondary that you start to see any change. As one of my senior (History) students asked, “Why are we the only one’s who know what’s going on and who care?”
Why is it that Whitlam was rejected because we weren’t “ready” as a country, but whenever something else pro-lefty happens with popular support, its the wisdom of the people - re 1983?
Wot Susoz said. and please let me brag that I was at the fence when Kerr spoke on that Melbourne Cup Day, and I was the first rabble to call out ‘he’s drunk!’ and started the general rousing he got.
re Whitlam’s ’scaring them shitless’ - highly intelligent people usually do frighten the mob.
For myself, I am scared shitless by dumb people.