Naomi Parry reviews the reception (and content) of Keith Windschuttle’s new book at New Matilda:
Late last year Keith Windschuttle released another book questioning the existence of the stolen generations. But this time, nobody cared.
Very few people would be aware that Keith Windschuttle released volume three of his series The Fabrication of Aboriginal History in December last year. As Robert Manne observed in his review of the book in The Monthly, it arrived to only the most “strangely muffled fanfare from his friends”.
Robert Manne’s review is here.
We’ve come a long way since the Howard era furore over Stolen Generations denialism. That’s a good thing.
Yesterday and Saturday’s RN Awaye! program had
Brian Butler, stolen generations campaigner; Dr Gordon Briscoe, historian and academic; Helen Moran, co-chairwoman of the National Sorry Day Committee; Professor Peter Read, historian & Keith Windschuttle, historian
in an extended and robust discussion around Windschuttle’s line that “the apology was a hollow public relations exercise designed to appease white audiences. His key argument is that Aboriginal children were removed on the same grounds as non-Aboriginal children – because they were orphaned, neglected or abused.”
You can still listen online or download.
Keith who?
I reccommend the Awaye program – I put aside my distaste for the idea of listening to Keith Bloody Windschuttle talking on the radio and got to hear Keith receiving a damn good kicking.
Naomi Parry delves into what makes Windschuttle tick on this subject and comes up with some fairly damming assessments – racism, class envy, income disparity etc. It is not the first time Parry has attacked. Judging by the panel he fronted at RN’s AWAYE program you cannot say Windschuttle lacks a certain courage.
I have great respect for his arch nemesis Peter Read and rate his book on the dispossession and dispersal of the Northern Sydney-Hawkesbury tribes a must read along with The Secret River set 200 years earlier. Fact and fiction? Windschuttle’s interest in first Australians had a long gestation too. I recall a Quadrant essay where he postulated a distinct racial grouping of small statured natives living, and surviving, in the North Queensland rainforests. Sorry I cannot find links. But it suggests Windschuttle comes from a local history of amateur historians/paleaontologists stretching back to colonial times – the bone and artefact collectors.
My regret is that this argument takes precedence over any debate about indigenous representation on a post-ATSIC body to be appointed to ‘advise’ Rudd on policy.
Are we still stuck in what Keating called an aboriginal oppositional approach to all things proposed by those with the power?
I would also argue, Mark, that is demonstrates how integral the prime minister and his/her party is in steering a national dialogue (to me, anyway, it’s amazing how quickly this fizzled sans Howard’s whistling). Of course, the question remains how national a dialogue it truly is outside a rarefied circle of journalists, (political) junkies, and the higher ed sector.
Nonetheless, within that circle, they wield a lot of power. To be honest, I would like this aspect of political practice to be highlighted more strongly. I don’t hold great hopes, forcing as it would the media to reveal their own complicity, but I think it would be useful in both highlighting the artificial nature of these conflicts, and the responsibility – politically, ethically – of politicians in pursuing them.
My reference was to Peter Read’s book ‘Belonging’ and Kate Grenville’s ‘The Secret River’. Apologies.
This is the money-quote in Manne’s demolition job on Windschuttle:
…Windschuttle is not alone in sharing this paranoiac trait with commentators such as Bolt, Akerman and others. One can’t maintain a kulturkampf shadow-boxing routine indefinitely, unless one convinces oneself that the shadows are real…
…of course, one’s analytic prowess takes a dive due to the cognitive contortions necessary to maintain one’s heroic persecution complex, cf. Quixote, Don.
Patrick @5 I’m sure that is true to a certain extent. I am also sure this volume of Fabrications is being ignored ( besides the lack of archival research outside NSW and that many of his claims are demonstrably false) because even the most ardent conservative would find it pitiable that Windschuttle is using Aboriginal people’s experiences to score ideological points. What a sad state of affairs.
Patrick:
“Of course, the question remains how national a dialogue it truly is outside a rarefied circle of journalists, (political) junkies, and the higher ed sector.”
A lot of my colleagues are Aboriginal and they are very aware of Windschuttle. The apology from Rudd was a signal day in my workplace and everyone present. Don’t underestimate the impact of this card carrying denialist Windschuttle.
Thanks to R Manne for the demolition job.
Thanks Mark for highlighting the Naomi Parry article.
One of the best things the Rudd government has done is to take membership of the board of the ABC out of the realm of political largesse.
A delightful book that puts a charming, human face to the topic of black / white relationships is: “Jackson’s Track – Memoir of a Dreamtime Place” (Daryl Tonkin and Carolyn Landon, Penguin, 1999). It gives a beautiful insight into how different this country could have been, if only ……..
What intruiges me about windschuttle is his role as a denialist; denialism has long been recognised as a post-genocidal moment in genocide studies. Anyone interested in further disection of windschuttle and his ilk couldn’t do netter than “With intent to destroy: reflecting on genocide” by now retired Professor of Politics at Macq U, Colin Martin Tatz.
A handy extract to whet your appetite can be viewed on Google books.
That Robert Manne review is an excellent headkicking demolition job. I recall his review of part 1 was excellent too. Very good work!
Totally ignored, eh? Just what is going on behind the scenes in the conservative wing of the commentariat, I wonder. Does this mean Andrew Bolt is also losing support for his pet cause from The Movers And Shakers?
I still have my fingers crossed that Windschuttle will continue his planned post-1900 series, as I reckon when he gets to the conscription crisis of WWI Keith will decide he has to advocate the notion that Mannix, Curtin et al were villains in order to restore balance to our great national storyline. Now that would be a daring bit of
reactionary militarismcontrarianism. C’mon, Dr Windschuttle, the silent majority are waiting for that book. Don’t let the PC brigade stop you from writing it. Nothing could possibly go wrong if you want to throw the entire weight of ‘Quadrant’ and the Oz’s op-ed pages behind such a glorious undertaking.If by this you mean Windschuttle is, at best, a parochial Sydneysider, then it reinforces Manne’s damning assessment of the man doing little or no research outside the NSW archives. So much for KW’s ambitions for this book being part of a greater collection about national history.
@13 –
No, it’s Mr Windschuttle.
“Dr Windschuttle
No, it’s Mr Windschuttle.”
No, you wouldn’t want to make THAT mistake.
I think what else has happened is Kevin Rudd saying sorry on behalf of the government has put a full stop on the end of this culture war. The danger of course is that the aboriginal community continues to suffer from under resourcing because the public believe “that’s all sorted now.”
Mark said:
I would look at the political and policy scoreboard before I started crowing about victory in the Culture War.
Rudd has continued in Howard’s footsteps. Unruly elements in the under-class have been brought to heel and their enablers in the cultural elites are in disgrace and disarray.
More Aboriginal children than ever are being taken into foster care. Pretty much everyone that matters has signed onto the Intervention. Mutual obligation is now de riguer in welfare. Border protection is being re-tightened. The Republic is dead in the water.
I love the smell of burning Left-liberal in the air, smells like Culture War victory.
I think I’ll wait until Volume 2 comes out before I read Volume 3. I wouldn’t want to miss out on any key plot points.
Jack that’s not a victory for anyone. It’s pretty shameful to crow about it.
Yabbut that is genuine(ly sad) welfare policy, not stopping-the-quadroons-from-producing-octaroons faux welfare policy.
I tried to read Vol. 1, but I gave up because there weren’t any key plot points.
Liam@#19 quotes Jack Strocchi:
Nonsense, its a victory for common sense. And a step up for the children at risk.
Its pretty shameful of Mark and the like to crow about some delusional victory in a Culture War when in reality what is occurring now is civil re-construction after the disastrous cultural offensives mounted by Left-liberals over the past 20 years or so.
A period of contemplation and contrition is contra-wise indicated. But shamefully not in evidence.
Its also perfectly proper for me to be pleased with a “corporal” policy that recognises reality (indigenous family breakdown) and does something to remedy it (fostering children at risk). At least someone somewhere recognises that underlying problem, which is the break down of law and order starting in the family unit.
Reality is what does not go away when you stop believing in it.
Philip K. Dick
Jack @above: no-one with any experience of either the history of genocide and in particular genocides against first nation peoples believes that the cultural collapse that indigenous Australians are experiencing is anything other than the ongoing effect of 200 years of genocidal policies and attitudes. There are answers, they are difficult to put in place. But the only people qualified to offer solutions are those who have turned to face their own collective cultural past and made a genuine attempt at compassionate healing. If you’ve not done that then you are part of an ongoing genocidal culture.
Cacambo@#23
Its been a while since someone accused me of being complicit in genocide. Apparently the charge is “failure to accept cultural constructivist anthropology and Left-liberal demonology”. The jails will be full to bursting point on that one!
Unfortunately your anthropology is no better than your jurisprudence.
The social pathologies experienced by indigenous peoples, and some immigrant groups to a certain extent, are generally a result of extreme culture shock. That is anomie resulting from the confrontation of pre-modern nature with post-modern cultures.
Aboriginals were unfortunate to receive their first culture shock treatment at a time of maximum social upheaval. Having evolved in isolation for 40,000 years they received emancipation in 1967 of all years, the year Sgt Pepper was released. Europeans experienced culture shock too. It was called the cultural revolution.
The cure for culture shock, whether Black or White, is a restoration of civil order, starting from the bottom-up at the atomic ie family scale. Only properly nurtured children can cope with the endless trials and temptations of post-modernity. Hence the importance of the Intervention, fostering etc
I do not blame Aboriginals for their travails. But neither do I blame European settlers. Only the most inistent Black Armbanders still make the accusation of genocide. Both Reynolds and Manne have stepped away from that one.
We are indebted to Cacambo for providing an insight into the Left-liberal Culture Warrior mind, if nothing else.
Jack Strocchi @ 24 sez: I blame “The Beatles”:
A fine example of arguing from myth rather than history:
I doubt that the Federal Parliament’s legislation in 1962 was influenced by the Australian chart-topping performance of “Love me Do” but I’m willing to concede the possibility. It’s equally unlikely that the Queensland decision to enfranchise aboriginals was a response to the release of “Help!” and “Rubber Soul”.
Nah, it was probably Phil Spector’s heavyhanded string arrangements on “The Long And Winding Road” that finally shattered the fabric of indigenous communities.
Nope, you’re forgetting all about that weird ear-bending chord that heralds the start of “A Hard Day’s Night.” That’s the culprit for sure.
If I could, I would also blame all the imbecilic violence, upheaval and waste of the Great Society on that chord as well. But I’m tone-deaf, so instead I blame leftists.
What can you do. If we’d all had the good sense to prefer “Between the Buttons” to “Sergeant Pepper,” nunna this woulda happened in the first place. “All Sold Out,” “Complicated,” and “Miss Amanda Jones” still have a smarter sound after all these years anyway. Were they listening to the Velvets on the sly? And more importantly, can we find a way to blame this for some massive social predicament?
j_p_z:
I think you’ve failed to take sufficient notice of the Righteous Brothers failure to hold the line with “You’ve Lost That Lovin’ Feeling”. And surely, the Bonzo Dog Doodah Band’s “Suspicion” heralded the dawn of a post-modernist re-evaluation of the agonised love song, and introduced deconstruction into the mainstream of popular culture.
I blame Pete Seeger.
Oh, Mark.
Don’t join the pile-on; musicians have little influence.
It has to be J.D. Salinger. Or Timothy Leary.
Or JFK with his quixotic quest for questionable lunar landings.
I mean, we should all try to hold ourselves to Jack’s high levels of logical rigour.
There couldn’t be indigenous or white Aussies involved….
i’m with jpz..it was brians marimbas on yesterdays’ papers
It was Ken Kesey Jack Kerouac or Allen Ginsberg, obviously.
Maybe if someone played Sgt Pepper backwards the harm would be undone.
Oh wait, that’s already been tried.
I suspect that part of what keeps Windschuttle going is the attention he gets from “his courageous stand”. It is good to have Robert Mann’s review as ammunition in case you really need to win an argument but, by and large, the less publicity the better.
What we and aborigines should do now is a more difficult question. I have watched for years people of good intent try their best to help aborigines. Some times they fail because they don’t understand just how different aboriginal culture is or that the more traditional aborigines have trouble understanding as well. Some times they fail because what they re trying to do is all about “white dreaming” rather than what the aborigines want or need. Sometimes too they fail because helping becomes addictive. They disempower aborigines by doing things for them instead of trying to convince them that “you can do it.”
What I really hope for for my aboriginal friends is that they get to have real choices. Real choices means that lack of education and knowledge of our culture prevents aborigines doing skilled and professional jobs in our culture if that is what they want. It also means retaining the culture and skills to live differently from mainstream culture if they choose (and the choice is not only between mainstream and a more traditional culture.) Above all it means learning that they, and only they, have the power to solve their problems.
failure
Folks, please, it’s Indigenous with a capital I, and Aboriginie/al with a capital A.
You know, like, Aussie? Or Inuit?
You can call me a pedant if you like, but I think that as australians we can understand the basis of the request.
Mark: “I blame Pete Seeger.”
Yeah me too… but then, I bet I blame him for a whole lot more than what you had in mind.
Now, now, Japerz, without Pete Seeger we probably wouldn’t have had Dylan or The Byrds.
John D @ 34 reminds me of an ‘incident’ I experienced a few years ago in the NSW country town I was living in. It was a very early morning ‘break and enter’ to the commercial premises next door that I awoke to. There was a young Aboriginal fellow visible in the service yard. After quizzing him I was told to fuck off as it wasn’t my land and anyway “all this country belonged to blackfellas”.
I admit this response threw me and while I watched on he eventually exited the same way he came. I suspect his response isn’t unique, that he had used it on plenty of occasions, perhaps with impunity. Nor did I bother calling the cops, 45 minutes away in the next town.
But it suggests to me that, along with data like incarceration rates, this underlying hostility to ‘occupation’ is widespread and should be a spur to a treaty. I would argue that the recent anniversary of two years since ‘sorry day’ with the advent of national Indigenous Rugby League as a calendar fixture will only exacerbate the issue the longer it remains unresolved.
Pablo @38: Too often what we hear from Aboriginal leaders is “if only”. The if only is usually something like new special rights, apologies and treaties that have to be done by someone else. Yet when action is taken the response is simply another “if only.” There is nothing new about this. I have watched it go on since the 1967 referendum.
The result has been a dis-empowering of grass roots Aborigines. If people keep hearing their leaders, white supporters and the media that “someone else” should fix things they end up being convinced that they can no longer fix things themselves. However, the real tragedy is that is often the grass roots and only the grass roots that have the power to improve things. For example, during the time I lived on Groote Eylandt there would have been fewer avoidable deaths if mothers had taken their sick children to the hospital before it was too late, the kids would have been better educated if they had gone to school more often and so on.
This doesn’t mean that we outsiders can do nothing. We do have to provide teachers, doctors etc. We often need to to teach Aborigines how to get things done in our society and give people the information required to get things done. Above all we need to applaud the successes and keep saying “you can do it” or such and such a community solved this problem themselves.
The Groote community is an enterprising community that has achieved a lot over the years. It has organized major festivals, one at least one tidy town competition among other things. Yet noe of this appears in the media. All you see is the occasional story about the high imprisonment rate.
Thanks Pablo and John D for bringing us back to relevance again, this old sore deserves it. I have had similar experiences and in the face of so much human failing, on all sides within the Indigenous – Nonindigenous relations, it is tempting to dish out blame all around in perpetuum, problem solved, hardly! I may suggest the two relevant issues in the Windschuttle debacle are not about the Indigenous issue per se. The first relates to the adherence to appropriate standards in the academic process of establishing relevant and sound history of the establishment of Australia as a Nation. The second relates to the constructive and effective use of this process, in order to enrich and enlighten our Nation, to provide it with a resource for growth and maturity.
First, Windschuttle has been consistently lacking adequate academic standard in his critique of the depth of research and use of primary sources of Historians such as Henry Reynolds. A paradigm challenging thesis has to be rigorously tested and its substance or basis thereof, as in primary sources, checked for validity and reliability. This is the simple but laborious task Historians earn their daily bread. In this Windschuttle has no credibility at all, as he is “clumsy”, if not straight out biased, in his research, as R. Manne in the Monthly article demonstrates again and again. Windschuttle has substantial, if not embarrassing, ‘history’ in being selectively sloppy on details. Essentially, he is less an Academic nor a Historian and more a political and cultural activist, adept in the use of media and well positioned to that end. Like a sophisticated shock jock, he fails to adequately base and operationalise the ‘objective truth’ of his narrow version of events and thus de-humanises the subject of inquiry for his own ‘Pop’ grand narrative. The reality of suffering, loss, loneliness, dispossession and annihilation are simply framed as political constructs in contrast to his evidence in the ‘objective’ colonial paper trail. Worse of all Windschuttle, as Manne pointed out in his closing paragraph, has become an obstacle, or as I call it, eye patch on what is a “blind spot in our National psyche”.
This brings me to the second relevant issue in this debacle. We, as a Nation, deserve better than this whole black and white, as in contrasting and racial framing of our past. Better, as in more nuanced more humane and dare I say more yielding. Windschuttle’s simple hijacking of the whole issue into a polarising debate is counterproductive. Take the ‘Lindy vs Dingo’ debacle, it narrowed relevant perspectives to just two points of view, end of story. This polarisation denied an appropriate resolution of the case and gaining valuable insights therein, such as the abysmal failure of the justice system and performance of the media. Such national blind spots not only stop us in resolving the mystery as such, they further assure for similar situations to end up with a similar results, which only benefits the commercial and political myth makers and consumption thereof, in essence though it is socially and culturally disabling. This is what Windschuttle, knowingly or not, is engaging in. Because, as I and others above in this thread suspect, his motivation is self-centered and with Fabrication he simply fans the embers of the dying spectacle in the hope to produce his own limelight again. Imagine for someone to dispute the deprivation, brutality and simple inhumanity the convicts had to endure, by adhering to the ‘objective truth’ that transportation was more humane than hanging them in the first place. I did wear a ‘Black Arm Band’ for a while after I read Hughes Fatal Shore. For I grieved in the face of so much loss of humanity, as in the suffering and pain these unfortunate people had to endure as well as for those that were administrating it. However, I started to see the ‘other’ pioneers and nation builders. Those hand cut stones in the older part of our cities gathered new and deeper meaning. It too, provided me with a sense of endurance and resilience inherited in this Nation, that I have been fortunately adopted in. Clearly this Nation was baptised violently with the blood of Black and White People, so lets honor the fact and make the best of it.
Hughes’s Fatal Shore is a very good novel.
“Hughes’s Fatal Shore is a very good novel.”
Yeah but the brass section needs work.
“For The Term of His Natural Life” however has great vocals and a light hand with the string arrangements.
And let us not forget “War and Peace”‘s great use of cannon percussion at the end of Volume Three.
And of course the ultra hard be-bop sax in “Naked Lunch” and wonderful fretless bass in “Gravity’s Rainbow”.
Not to mention the sad violins in The Old Curiousity Shop (which is probably not a good novel.)
And Emily Bronte’s brill cello in “Wuthering Heights” and Evelyn Waugh’s surprisingly accomplished use of novelty banjo in the “Sword Of Honour” trilogy.
Oh yes, JPZ @27. The Stones did come up with a lovely organic woody sound for “Between The Buttons” and then “Beggars Banquet” that I think reflected the nature of “something happened to me yesterday” meets gray old England far better than “revolver” and “St Pepper’s” insulated peace and love vibe.
However “Satanic Majesties” despite being more electrically enhanced and overtly trippy still has some great gems on it. “The Lantern” is just waiting to be covered as a great trash trip-hip song.
And of course “2000 Light Years From Home”, another example of the Stones almost casually pissing all over arty contenders like Pink Floyd.
About the only well known English writers back then using the same instruments and production sounds were Ballard, Carter and Moorcook.
Well said Ootz. However, there are two separate questions: What is the truth and what effect is this endless culture war having?
My argument is that the culture war is seriously damaging to Aborigines. Not because people like Windschuttle are playing games with the truth but because the war dis-empowers Aborigines by encouraging them to concentrate on past wrongs instead of concentrating on the power they have to create a better future for themselves.
So yes, it would be a good idea if we ignored the invitation to a culture war.
“His key argument is that Aboriginal children were removed on the same grounds as non-Aboriginal children – because they were orphaned, neglected or abused.”
Then his key argument is piffle. Aboriginal children of mixed ancestry were the ones targeted in the stolen generation era.
If it was a child welfare policy, as Manne and others have pointed out, then Aboriginal children without mixed parentage would have been taken away at the same rate too.
They werent. Because it wasn’t a child welfare policy, it was a racial policy to isolate mixed race children from indigenous parents.
Windy lost this argument years ago – only sheer lack of grace prevents him moving on. Time for him to cop it on the chin and get over the embarrassment of being such a public idiot – everyone else has, forgotten about him, and moved on with the much deserved apology.
I spose we did those British kids a favour too, did we? No apology warranted there either.
Im glad the country is bigger than you and Howard, Keith. Little white men of a bygone era.
Given Windy’s own wildly swinging ideological bent over his own life, I’d suggest his latest tome sounds like this.
Also why has no smartarse commentator pointed out that “The Fabrication of Aboriginal History” is title that would seriously backfire. Just like Cherry Cola.
Disclaimer: I have no aboriginal blood in me whatsoever. In fact my
descendentsancestors used to seriously abuse the Irish. Ah, good times, good times.Gummo Trotsky@#24 takes liberties with the truth:
G. Trotsky et al have got some cheek complaining about Right-wing interpretations of history given this example of selective quotation and specious interpretation. Now I know why Windschuttle complained about Left-liberal “fabricating” and “killing” of history.
He’s not Robinson Crusoe. I go away for the weekend and return to find LP’s purple facade breaking out in an ugly rash of comments from Nabakov, j_p_z, Mark, Katz, Paul Burns et al. Going by the mass delusional triggered by my innocuous musical-political reference one suspects there are more than a few embittered Culture War veterans still roaming the mean streets of academe or bureau, fingers itching to shoot the messenger.
I will take that bullet. It was too much to expect an ovation from the enraged patrons in the members grand stand when a winning team-player points to the scoreboard anyway.
There are compensations for running the gauntlet. To pile on the mixed metaphors, now I know how the shooting party feels when the rabbits get flushed out of their smelly little warrens. [sound of action being pumped on a 12-gauge] Now for the prospect of some real slaughter, heh heh heh.
Lets start with the first bunny to pop up its head. Whats most stunning about Mark’s post, and the ragged jeers from the cheap seats, is the chutzpah of Australian Left-liberals, chanting as if they have won the Culture War in the aftermath of their biggest defeat in a generation: the Intervention. Its as if the post-Yeltsin Communist Party decided to mount a May Day parade and then go on to heckle the GOP convention.
Guys, I don’t know how to break this to you gently so I will do it brutally: you lost. The battle for both indigenous policy and the political high ground is over, irrespective of symbolic sops like the Apology. And this was no mere flesh wound, but a mortal injury. There will be no going back to failed experiments of Left-liberalism’s Golden Age, like Coombs Noble Savage “seperate development” fantasies or Fraser’s “sit down money” welfare maladministration.
Blowing lame raspberries is a poor substitute for victory in a decisive Culture War battle. Choke on it, losers.
Well Jack, if you could start thinking about this as an issue about Indigenous Australians, rather than merely a boring old Anglo left-right dispute about the apology, you might notice indigenous people have been flipping the bird at the the ‘intervention’. http://www.theage.com.au/national/outcast-aborigines-stage-red-desert-walkout-20100212-nxko.html
Couldnt blame them.
Never underestimate a rabbit.
What? You don’t like the Beat Poets and novelists and their offshoots, Jack? Shame on you. You’re missing something.
You see, Jack, Windschuttle is not a very good historian because he fails in several criteria all historians must follow : he doesn’t get basic facts right; he engages in ad hominem arguments – (by all means attack one’s colleagues’ arguments if you disagree with them but don’t personally attack the colleague -); he ignores arguments, and more importantly, evidence, that disprove his hypotheses; I could go on, but clearly its a waste of time.
Its not about culture wars, Jack; its about objecting to the writing of bad history.
For you, Jack, in case you missed it when you were a kid.
http://sprayberry.tripod.com/poems/howl.txt
Paul Burns@#54
Whatever gave you that idea.
I’ve forgotten more than most people will ever know in that department. In the early nineties I spent more than three months On The Road driving across the US.
City Lights is alright but I preferred Alice’s Underground.
Delighted to hear it, Jack. (I had the pleasure of meeting Allen Ginsberg when he was in Oz. He said “Om.”
Allen Ginsburg also wondered out loud why a trendy cafe in Carlton was decorated with portraits of North American First Nations leaders, when Australian Aborigines had so much to offer Australians.
*Ginsberg*
Jack Strocchi
Look, I tend to agree with you, I too was a tad disappointed with the musical references from the more accomplished contributors here. Perhaps, I was expecting too much or maybe Keiths latest contribution was just not deemed to be worth the effort. However, I would like to clarify a few things since I took your comment @51 a little personal.
” … ragged jeers from the cheap seats, is the chutzpah of Australian Left-liberals, chanting as if they have won the Culture War in the aftermath of their biggest defeat in a generation: the Intervention.”
In regards to the ‘raged cheers’, I thought the main point I and many others on this thread, including Mark, and R Manne in The Monthly have made was, a fraud is a fraud is a fraud – can we please move on. I may only have a cheap seat in this spectacle. However, when it comes to recognising frauds and charlatans like Windschuttle and Monckton, you don’t need a shiny ar5e from sitting in a desk chair all day. This is not about some cultural war nor about the Murries. This is about an individual falsely claiming credibility in an academic field and in public, which he demonstrably does not possess. Further, as far as I am aware, non of us mentioned a war or expressed a desire to participate in one. Wars tend to be counterproductive and a waste of resources, just check the latest installment in the war on terrorism and drugs. If you have one bone of culture in you, then you realise that ‘cultural war’ is an oxymoron or at least a form of cannibalism. Lastly, in this spectacle the Murries are just the unfortunate soapbox onto which Windschuttle choose to stand on to peddle himself. So here is not the place for your gloating about The Intervention.
AFAIK, if Keith Windschuttle insists to continue with this charade, then he needs to be made aware of the contemporary equivalent of a barrel of tar and bag of feathers waiting for him.
Cheers Ootz
But Strocchers, if justifying your argument relies upon a reference to the temporal propinquity of Sgt Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band, then may I humbly suggest you don’t have much of an argument.
Surely Steve Sailer, Richard J. Herrnstein and Charles Murray, or even Frank Knopfelmacher had meatier evidence than that!
Windschuttle is using Aboriginal people’s experiences
.
I thought everybody did that.