The latest front in the war on terror (please correct me if I’ve missed the most recent rebranding) – the history wars. Fresh from deciding that there is one growth opportunity for publicly funded higher education – Government Imam Academies (is there a system of accreditation for your local Catholic priest or Uniting Church minister?), the ever energetic Dr Brendan Nelson has suggested that terrorism could be stopped if students in Islamic schools were taught about Simpson and his donkey.
“We don’t care where people come from; we don’t mind what religion they’ve got or what their particular view of the world is. But if you want to be in Australia, if you want to raise your children in Australia, we fully expect those children to be taught and to accept Australian values and beliefs,” he said.
“We want them to understand our history and our culture, the extent to which we believe in mateship and giving another person a hand up and a fair go. And basically, if people don’t want to be Australians and they don’t want to live by Australian values and understand them, well basically they can clear off.”
Dr Nelson said if the country lost sight of what Simpson and his donkey represented, “then we will lose the direction of the country”. John Simpson Kirkpatrick, carrying wounded soldiers on his donkey, is the iconic image of Gallipoli. “He represents everything at the heart of what it means to be Australian.”
You know, the funny thing is that I don’t recall being taught about Simpson and his donkey at school, and somehow I still support things like democracy and the rule of law. Puzzling.
I also support collective care for other citizens and investment in equality of opportunity as part of mateship and a fair go. I’m not so sure Nelson, Costello and Howard do.
With Marilyn Lake, I hope that this newfound enthusiasm for reviving history teaching in schools will also pay attention to the history of democratic struggles for workers’ rights and social welfare and the ballot in this country. It would seem to me that this history might be better suited to inculcating an understanding of democracy – something that we can never take for granted and something which always has to be fought for – than militaristic myths about mateship.
Part of the problem with Nelson’s hyperactive diktats is that under federalism, he doesn’t actually have to take any responsibility for running schools just funding them (in part). So the mercurial Minister can dash around the country articulating his latest bright sparks, and all of a sudden schools grants are tied to flag flying, report cards, phonics teaching, values and Great War stories. All without any responsibility for a comprehensive and holistic process of thinking about what school education should be, and for actually implementing it on the ground.
In the same article, the PM says:
“It is very hard for a government or any of its agencies to penetrate every aspect of life, and we don’t want to interfere with people’s enjoyment of life,” he said.
“But equally, if people are not willing to give their first loyalty to this country, they obviously must understand that that will arouse enormous concern within the rest of the Australian community.”
Don’t be alarmed, I’m sure he’s working on trying to penetrate every aspect of life. Since when was it part of a liberal society (as opposed to an authoritarian conservative one) for the government to enforce one-sided nationalistic values as ours?
Personally, I think they’d have more luck with Shrek and his little donkey, the little Muslim kiddies would learn just as much about values from that bit of animated genius.
Ooops! have I just derided Australian culture in favour of an imported American flavour? How silly of me, but then again I suppose that’s on the approved list.
According to the historian they had on the radio this morning,
Simpson was a queue jumping illegal immigrant. Is this the kind of example we want for Australia?
A couple of us were discussing this at Saturday Salon this morning. I’ll reposterficate mine here!
#1
Yes, tagging along on ill-defined imperial ventures in the Middle East is a great national tradition and truly Ostrayan, Brendan. In case grieving parents ask awkward questions later and we cant explain (or admit) what the hell it was about, weÄôll sacralise mateship and mythologise the savage, wasteful pointlessness of their deaths away. So that any critique of our eternally craven, arselicking political elite becomes sacreligious, and they get off scot-free again.
Can I have an ARC grant now, you bog-populist prick?
#2
The Right on history is all over the shop at the moment. eg Costello knocks “the left” for forgetting the Pacific war in some anti-American hissyfit.
Meanwhile, back in reality, his government has just spent ten years rebooting Gallipoli as the central myth against KeatingÄôs valiant efforts to give the national light of day to Kokoda.
Yes, that Kokoda Peter. Rememeber it?
Pete, Why is the Right so anti-American in its choice of national symbols? Is it because the US alliance was actually an ALP job?
Im bored of this oz history clown show. Bring on the dancing elephants.
Dr Nelson also demanded an explanation from University of Western Sydney vice-chancellor Janice Reid over a speech to a student meeting this week by former Guantanamo Bay detainee Mamdouh Habib.
Mr Habib, who returned to Australia this year when the United States did not press charges, addressed a students’ association forum on war, terrorism and civil liberties.
Dr Nelson said Mr Habib had “peddled his anti-American view of the world”.
Professor Reid said the university had followed protocols and informed the authorities, who had monitored the meeting. “Although we may not condone what a visitor to the university says, we support free speech as long as it does not foster hate, bigotry or violence.”
Put this together with Dr Nelson’s remarks about what he considers acceptable behaviour in people who want to be in Australia and it sort of looks like his ideal is that we should be able to deport anybody we don’t want here, citizen or not.
Oh, hang on, we already deport our own citizens now and again, don’t we?
Since when was it part of a liberal society (as opposed to an authoritarian conservative one) for the government to enforce one-sided nationalistic values as ours?
Since the Left began giving aid and comfort to our enemies by systematically attacking all Australian values.
Why exactly should UWS “follow the protocols” and report to “the authorities” that Habib was speaking on campus? So much for free speech in this country. This postmodern McCarthyism is out of control.
Who is THE LEFT?
What aid and comfort?
Who are our enemies?
What are Australian values?
Who’s your daddy?
”Dr Nelson said if the country lost sight of what Simpson and his donkey represented, “then we will lose the direction of the country”. ”
Could be a hint of new green transportation policies? Biogas?
”John Simpson Kirkpatrick, carrying wounded soldiers on his donkey, is the iconic image of Gallipoli. “He represents everything at the heart of what it means to be Australian.””
Meantine ‘Jacko’ on the other side represents everything un-Australian. No bravery, resolve and ingenuity of course.
Supporting the then failed policy of the UK at Gallipoli reminds some of us of its moral equivilency, a collective government head stuck in the colon of the USA. Brilliant representations he doth make.
“All without any responsibility for a comprehensive and holistic process of thinking about what school education should be, and for actually implementing it on the ground.”
Well said Mark.
This is the problem I have with people like Nelson, Costello, Kevin Donnelly et al when they attack education. They are not interested in actually solving any problems. They get their kicks from the their myths about how the left is destroying schools and don’t give a rats arse about the real problems.
The piss poor facilities are the biggest problem. Left or right teachers have enough problems with poor facilities, the petty politics, the constant denigration from and lack of support for education by both State and Federal government before they even have a change to think about spreading their ideology.
Why exactly should UWS “follow the protocols” and report to “the authorities” that Habib was speaking on campus?
Because Habib is a terror suspect.
So much for free speech in this country.
What are you talking about? The fanatic wasn’t prevented from spreading his bile, so how is “freedom of speech” affected?
For real censorship you need look no further than Victoria’s Labor government, which has made it illegal to criticise religion.
Lucky for C.L. he doesn’t live in Victoria, then, EP.
Seriously, why should a citizen who’s been charged with nothing, be surveilled constantly by secret police because they have “suspicions” that he might be a terrorist? If they have any evidence, they should act on it according to due process of law. Is this really the sort of country you want to live in?
All this talk about “people coming to our country” is just plain laughable, surely. God back far enough, and all us whgiteys are boat people. I don’t see Nelson, Costello et al rushing off to embrace the Aboriginal way of life, do you?
“Our way of life” is just a way of saying “we don’t like foreigners, we suspect you don’t either, and we’re going to whistle the dogs every time we feel like a jolly-up on talkback radio.”
Fucking pathetic.
Odd too isn’t that all these ‘Aussie values” crusaders would have gone through our education system in the 70s and 80s, a period when it supposed to be a hotbed of Left PC subversion indoctrinating our youth with anti-”true blue” sentiments, and yet somehow emerged untainted.
The cry “our education system is being ruined” has been heard as long as there was one, and yet the Western world keeps getting richer, more entreprenuial and creative and is now building immense stocks of knowledge at a rate unparalleled in human history. Someone must have been doing something right. I reckon it was my old English teacher, Mr Bull.
Seriously, why should a citizen whoÄôs been charged with nothing, be surveilled constantly by secret police because they have “suspicions” that he might be a terrorist?
Because they have suspicions that he might be a terrorist.
All this talk about “people coming to our country” is just plain laughable, surely. Go back far enough, and all us whiteys are boat people.
Precisely.
And look what happened to the natives when they failed to control the arrival of the boat people. Their whole society and way of life got destroyed by the flood of immigrants who refused to integrate.
That’s why we need to be able to decide who comes here and who stays here.
Can’t say I disagree with EP’s response above. Habid aside, if ASIO or whatever suspects somoene is a terrorist, I’d damn well want them to be watching the bugger.
As to whether they do it compentently or within a effective regulatory, supervisory and operational framework is of course another matter.
Thanksyou for comfirming my theory about the Right’s paranoia regarding boat people, EP.
You have now conceded that the white settlement of Australia was morally indefensible, and rested solely (as does your view of life) on the theory of “might makes right”.
You dickhead.
I meant of course EP’s comment on Mark’s comment on surveilling terrorists.
Although the one directly after should not pass unremarked too. Be fascinating to see what happens if EP trots that point out on RWDB sites.
Although Nabs after years of shit at gitmo, logically he would most likely not be ‘re-involved’ in terrorism given there is no proof whatsover that he ever was.
Comes across as practically a broken man ie no threat to anybody.
You have now conceded that the white settlement of Australia was morally indefensible, and rested solely (as does your view of life) on the theory of “might makes right”.
That’s a self-contradiction. Since the white settlement of Australia was morally based on the principle that might is right, it is not morally indefensible.
I take it that you concede that controlling who comes here is both morally right and indispensable to the well-being of all Australians.
Be fascinating to see what happens if EP trots that point out on RWDB sites.
I’ll have to try it some time.
Since the logic and historical factuality of my point are unassailable, I expect that most people will agree, and adopt it as an argument.
Here some Core Ostrayan values:
The weekend: Brought to you courtesy of the Australian labour movement. Opposed by Conservatives.
The Vote: Brought to you courtesy of the Australian labour movement. Opposed by Conservatives.
I love talking about Australian values, precisely because no-one has any idea what the hell they are. They’re like porn: we know them when we see them!
Well, the revival of nationalism means that we all know that we’re girt by sea, Kate. I think. Is that a value?
Frankly, I think the idea of formalising core values is un-Australian. A fine nose for the boss’s bullshit is not though.
Would childen also be taught about ‘Ghan’ and his camels?
Unlikely, FaceLift. Bob Katter of course is a descendant of the Afghans – and he seems to have absorbed Australian values rather well. Must be all that schoolin’ the Country Party so ardently championed in the Queensland of the 50s.
I think the idea of formalising core values is un-Australian.
I think you’re right. It would probably be more practical to formalise what values are unacceptable in Australia. The UK has formalised a list of anti-British values that will result in expulsion; perhaps we could do the same.
Sorry, that first link was menat to be italics.
Followed the link, EP. The things on that list aren’t values.
Yeah. I went to the first link and found no value at all.
The things on that list are behaviours that reflect underlying values.
No they’re not, EP. Terrorism is a tactic which can be motivated by any number of values.
“…Since the white settlement of Australia was morally based on the principle that might is right, it is not morally indefensible….”
I take it logic is not your strong point, EP. Your little summation only makes any sense if you accept that the principle of “might make right” is morally defensible. Which it isn’t.
So what now?
It’s either that, EP, or you’ll concede that all successful military actions are morally jusified. These would include the Russian October Revolution, all actions subsequently undertaken by the NKVD/KGB, any anti-democratic military coups anywhere…
…you’re just being silly. Have you decided to become the Slammin’ Sammy Kekovich of the blogosphere? Or are you parodying yourself unwittingly?
Of course the principle that might makes right is morally defensible.
If you think about it, “might makes right” is one of the only two practical moral principles that there are, or ever can be.
That’s because any moral principle which cannot be put into practice is meaningless. Either you attempt to have the might to impose your view of right, or you embrace total passivity. Anything else is mere theory.
These paras from Mark’s post (quoted from the PM) remind me of propaganda from the North Korean Worker’s Party…
“It is very hard for a government or any of its agencies to penetrate every aspect of life, and we donÄôt want to interfere with peopleÄôs enjoyment of life,” he said.
“But equally, if people are not willing to give their first loyalty to this country, they obviously must understand that that will arouse enormous concern within the rest of the Australian community.”
Getting back to the matter of teaching history. . .
I take the view that Australian history needs to be taught in terms of both its continuities and its discontinuities with European history. For example, what did it mean for a branch of British-derived historical development to commence at Circular Quay in 1788 without the British post-feudal landowning aristocracy, in isolation from the Industrial Revolution commencing at that time, in abrasive contact with indigenous civilisation, with English Protestants and Irish Catholics in the same settlements, and in completely different environmental circumstances from those of Britain? And taking Mark’s point about the importance of teaching the core principles of democracy and the rule of law, one might also want to bring in the influence on Australian political actors of the liberal innovations in political philosophy devised by the authors of the US Constitution (not to mention their forebears in Classical Antiquity).
Of course any such attempts to teach proper history (especially in schools) would be bedevilled by allegations of bias and of subversive intent in the curriculum. It is difficult to imagine such allegations *not* being levelled against courses dealing with significant developments since the Wars of the Roses in pre-Colonial British history, colonial Australian history or post-Federation Australian history. Imagine yourself, as a teacher of a multi-denominational class of kids with multi-denominational parents, having to pose the question of whether the Reformation was a good thing or a bad thing!
I thought the PM’s comments were a bit of a worry too, Sachmo. The government has absolutely no business penetrating every aspect of life, or even thinking about attempting to. What an appalling vision. The most important task of a democratic government is to get out of people’s faces, and stay out.
In similar vein, I can’t claim to know what Australian values really are but whatever they are is for the people to determine, in their inchoate and imprecise way, not the freaking government.
Well now I’m confused. We’re supposed to be *proud* of Simpson and his Donkey? I thought that ‘the present generation cannot be held responsible for what happened in the past’.
What Rob said!
Yeah, what Rob said. Additional: what Mark said.
Three cheers for Fyodor!
I think the PM is actually denying that it’s either possible or desirable for the government to infiltrate every aspect of life. After all, government infiltration into every aspect of life is a leftist concept, and he’s not a leftist.
Nor is he attempting to determine what Australian values are. That’s a project of leftist social engineers, and the PM is not a leftist.
What he’s actually saying is that new immigrants must adapt to existing Australian values, and if they refuse to do so, they should leave.
This is an entirely fair and reasonable statement, and one that every sane Australian should accept.
Jo, you’re forgetting that there’s a mystical essence of Australian-ness that even illegal immigrants and donkeys can partake in provided they vote for their Liberal mates.
”must adapt to existing Australian values, and if they refuse to do so, they should leave.”
Which values EP and defined by who?
What Mark said.
If I remember correctly, a plank of the North Korean Worker’s Party is to ensure “the complete monolithic domination of North Korea” (or something like that). I suppose that in North Korea the government or its agencies could penetrate every aspect of life.
I wonder what thoughts have crossed Johnny’s mind?
But seriously, any notion of massive Aust. government surveillance, even just the suggestion of it, should be howled down.
Does anyone else pick up a theme…
– Nelson saying he’ll talk to the VC of Western Sydney Uni because Mr. Habib spoke there recently (whatever happened to free speech?)
– Nelson talking about how people who don’t share Australian values should “clear off” (what are Australian values?)
– Howard talking about people’s first loyalty should be to their country.
Presumably, Howard is saying that one’s loyalty should be to Australia before other countries – which makes sense – but I’m starting to pick up a vibe of “you’re with us and accept our values, or against us and we might throw you out.” And I don’t like the federal govt. defining “Australian values”!
As good a reason as any to throw Howard out next election (ok, ok, I won’t say it any more!).
Howard’s doing his usual shtick – “on one hand civil liberties are important…”.
Perhaps Popper best defined values which all of us could reflect upon.
EP, if that’s what Howard actually said or intended I wouldn’t have a problem with it. But the words as quoted seemed highly alarming.
Which values EP and defined by who?
Democracy and the rule of Australian law would be the most fundamental and easily enforceable.
Others would include the use of English as the official and primary language of the country, and freedom of expression in doing so. These could all be defined by law.
Other, less tangible values would be defined by Australians in general, and encompass a feeling of identity and loyalty to one’s fellow Australians rather than some ideology or group identity or foreign country.
Specifically, people who consider that Islam and Shar’i'a Law are their primary loyalties would be excluded.
Peter, weren’t you paying attention? We’ll know the values when we see them!
Or rather, when the values/thought police start policing it. I can envision it now:
Scene: suburban Perth. Kate is eating her breakfast meal, probably organic museli with a cup of fairtrade coffee.
Knock on the door. Battalion of Thought Police are outside with guns and stuff.
Kate: Who is it?
Thought cop: We have dedicated a breach in Australian Values! You are eating neither WeetBix nor Vegemite for breakfast! You are not drinking Milo or tea! You are a lefty commie and we’re here to deport you to New Zealand!
Kate: But I was reading the Daily Tele and thinking about sport!
Thought cop: Alright then, we’ll let you off with a citation this time.
I await the exodus of Bushite neoconservatives to the USA. Hope you can get a green card!
In my hastily composed comment, it should be “detected” and not “depicted”.
Thankyou,
K. I-am-afraid-of-Net-stalkers-which-is-why-I-don’t-use-my-fairly-uncommon-surname.
Kate, but shouldn’t you have been apron-clad and waiting on Mr Kate before he goes off to be a good provider, handsome and true?
In a Kafkaesque world, Kate, those of us forenamed K. are not safe from the shadowy forces of the Thought Police!
Yeah, huge change there.
Why change? What’s wrong with Arabic?
Yes, it’s about time our government stopped slavishly following foreign countries.
Yeah, let’s kick out all those religious nutjobs. Start with those Christian trouble-makers.
Does anyone else pick up a theme…
- Nelson saying heÄôll talk to the VC of Western Sydney Uni because Mr. Habib spoke there recently (whatever happened to free speech?)
- Nelson talking about how people who donÄôt share Australian values should “clear off” (what are Australian values?)
- Howard talking about peopleÄôs first loyalty should be to their country.
I detect a theme.
The theme is that Howard is doing the right thing, and taking action to protect our country from domestic terrorism. At long last, the evil monolith of political correctness is being demolished, and sanity is being put in its place.
For this alone he deserves to be re-elected yet again.
Right, let’s all worship the evil monolith of sanity.
Under those suggestions, d’yer reckon the Pope would get in the country for Catholic Yoof Day in 2008?
Incidentally, EP, do you like the idea of Government Imam Academies?
Nah, Luke. Pope doesn’t have Vegemite on Toast for breakfast either, and I bet he doesn’t spend much time thinking about sport. ‘Specially cricket.
Incidentally, EP, do you like the idea of Government Imam Academies?
Not particularly.
I’d prefer not to have any imams at all. I’m not sure that having academies for them would actually make them any better, though it might be worth a try.
I think a crash program in Middle Eastern Languages for ASIO, and bugs in every mosque, would be a better alternative. It’s not what the imams say in public and in English that’s important, but what they say in private and in Arabic.
Sorry Kate, feeding the open mouths here.
”Others would include the use of English as the official and primary language of the country, and freedom of expression in doing so. These could all be defined by law.”
Really funny when the RWs start talking about law.
Prosecutor: ”Your honour, the defendant is charged with un-Australian malice aforethought, speaking with his partner in a foreign language, in a supermarket, contrary to section 56 of the Foreign Languages Illegality Patriot Act 2005.”
It’s even funnier when lefties use silly strawman arguments to prove they have no rational response.
So draft the law for us EP (hint) without violating the constitution. Give it a name at least, that should be funny enough! How about this:
” Wog Languages Bill 2005”?
Peter Kemp, it appears you have become confused on this issue by attempting to live in the real world. If you would only spend more time discussing this issue with white, male, upper-class, nominally Christian folk over a few beers and a BBQ, I’m sure things would quickly become much clearer to you.
And make sure you discuss it in English, Peter.
Yeah Luke, Kate but it’s so much fun using the unreal world’s language.
”Untermenschen Verboten…”
That’s where it eventually becomes terminal.
You’re a very silly man, Peter.
I think you should learn to understand the meaning of plain English sentences. You could start with these:
“Others would include the use of English as the official and primary language of the country, and freedom of expression in doing so. These could all be defined by law.”
When you’ve mastered the ability to understand simple propositions, I may get back to you. Until then, there’s no point trying to debate with a clown.
”These could all be defined by law.”
So define them EP, if you can understand a simple proposition you made.
Yep, the Wog Languages Bill it would be, quite like the that practised in Quebec. And probably backed up with a department of Pre and thought crime.
“Democracy and the rule of Australian law would be the most fundamental and easily enforceable. Others would include the use of English as the official and primary language of the country, and freedom of expression in doing so”
Even so EP, what does that have to do with some guy and his donkey? Nothing!
Say, EP, one more question before I take my pills.
Freedom of expression in speaking English… unless you express unAustralian values, of course, whence you are deported. How does that work again?
So if I have freedom of expression, but I say, I hate Australia, how can you punish me for my unAustralian values?
The big red nose and floppy shoes suit you, Peter.
Victoria already has an anti-language law on its books, Peter – one that you support.
All unanswered and unanswerable questions from RWDB who hate being punctured by satirical arguments can be addressed to:
dan.quayle@slowmovingtarget.com.au
So if I have freedom of expression, but I say, I hate Australia, how can you punish me for my unAustralian values?
Freedom of expression, as “defined by law”, Kate.
It’s not a new idea. We already have laws against defamation, sedition, incitement to violence, and vilification.
It would merely require a change to the existing restrictions on freedom of expression. For example, we could repeal the Victorian legislation that bans criticism of religion, and instead make it illegal to praise terrorism.
I love the way your nose honks when you squeeze it, Peter.
Honk! Honk!
Chestnut Wild, that’s not anti-language, that’s anti-incitement, and many disagree but that’s not the point here at all which is, for the moment, minority languages being un-Australian.
The point here is that all Peter’s posts about language are straw-man fallacies.
Send in the clowns …
I think not speaking English is something for the community to deal with – i.e. neighbours saying ‘You really ought to learn the language, you know’ – not the law, although perhaps compulsory education in English might be the way to go. I’d be very uncomfortable with a policy that said you had to be able to speak English in order to enter Australia.
Don’t pay any attention to Peter’s nonsense, Chestnut.
Making English the official language (if it isn’t already) has no relation whatsoever to the idea of banning other languages.
Peter is just making up fake arguments because he’s not capable of dealing with real ones.
I loved it when Evil Pundit said:
“ItÄôs not what the imams say in public and in English thatÄôs important, but what they say in private and in Arabic.”
So, what DO they say, mate? And how do you know?
To address the post directly – and it is a good one – I reckon we ought to propose a few other historical figures that embody Nelson’s values.
I’m thinking of another brave man, a man who fought and died for his country, and who became a symbol for others as they struggled against injustice. Even his enemies referred to him as a “brave and independent character.”
Pemulwuy.
Now there’s a proud Aussie who stood up for his values.
Perhaps Nelson can broaden his syllabus to include a raft of diverse individuals that would highlight the real history of Australia, not just the romanticised one that he grew up believing in.
So, what DO they say, mate? And how do you know?
I know that some of them support terrorism, and I know it through organisations like MEMRI.
As I said above, ASIO should invest heavily in training non-Muslim Australians to understand Middle Eastern languages, and should put audio bugs in all the mosques.
After we learn ‘em our values with stories about the queue jumping illegal immigrant with a donkey who changed his name, John Simpson Kirkpatrick, then we can sling ‘em Ned Kelly, armed insurrectionist who wanted to overthrow the government by force, then perhaps they can sing our alt.nat.anthem, Waltzing Matilda about a non working tramp who pinches a sheep and suicides to avoid lawful capture, then we teach ‘em about Mannix the Irish Catholic who wouldnÄôt let the micks be conscripted. That should inject a few of the right values into them for a start.
Pemulwuy.
Now thereÄôs a proud Aussie who stood up for his values.
He was a racist and a xenophobe.
However, at least he believed in deciding who comes to this country.
… any moral principle which cannot be put into practice is meaningless. Either you attempt to have the might to impose your view of right, or you embrace total passivity. Anything else is mere theory.
Democracy and the rule of Australian law would be the most fundamental and easily enforceable.
At the point of a gun, presumably. But then you can enforce any values you want that way.
The shorter EP: Australian values grow out of the barrel of a gun.
The shorter EP: Australian values grow out of the barrel of a gun.
Australian laws do.
Have you ever noticed those funny objects that police officers carry on their hips?
Every government enforces its decrees ultimately through its ability and willingness to use force.
I think The Church’s “Under The Milky Way” is a Core Australian Value. I bet Peter Costello doesn’t even know it.
Can anyone say IRONY?
T.Rex bah. I’ll bet Andrew Bartlett plays that all the time. No for true core oz values make them listen to ACCADACCA non stop. The pinnacle – LWTTTIYWR’n'R. The exam – can you do air guitar and lay on back like Angus – no – send ‘em back. yes – you’re in maate.
FX Holden, I think it much more appropros would be “Jailbreak”, or failing that, “Dirty Deeds Done Dirt Cheap” (that’s got a fantastic drum riff on it which I must remember to sample one day). At a pinch, “Can I Sit Next To You Girl?”.
You know what “Long Way To The Top” and “Under The Milky Way” share in common? Yep – they are both proof that of what a truly great Rock Instrument the Bagpipes are.
Jailbreak should be the national anthem.
Chestnut Wild, that’s all very nice, but the Howard Government when it came into office actually stripped funding off the programmes that were in place to teach migrants English.
As for those Government Imam Academies, does this sound at all familiar?
Section 116 – Commonwealth not to legislate in respect of religion
The Commonwealth shall not make any law for establishing any religion, or for imposing any religious observance, or for prohibiting the free exercise of any religion, and no religious test shall be required as a qualification for any office or public trust under the Commonwealth.
Ironic, really, given Costello’s praise for secular law the other night – and our constitution of course.
EP
“Have you ever noticed those funny objects that police officers carry on their hips?”
and
“Every government enforces its decrees ultimately through its ability and willingness to use force”
Mate, I can say here in Victoria they’re not used to enfore law. They’re used to protect life, ours and unfortunate bystanders. You belittle the decision to use a weapon. I can’t say when you where last on the street and delt with peoples lives and death, so I don’t know your credibility so correct me if your experience is different. However mine is as a paramedic that guns are a last resort to protect life. You degrade members of the emerency services by using them as an example for government control. Guns are not drawn for legislation. Only for life and death situations.
Bugger Simpson, cop killer, hostage taker and pub wrecker Ned is the man — the essential Australian.If you want insight into the Australian character or a manifestation of our values, you don’t need to look any further than our Glorious Ned.
What do ya reckon Evil?
The Postcard Bandit for PM!
Roger Rogerson as Foreign Minister.
And “Gunner” Kelly as Defence Minister.
Once you follow the logical collary advanced above by EP and then taken up with mucho glee by others, this shit just writes itself doesn’t it?
Tilly Devine as minister for social security.
Check this link, especially the cartoon.
http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/no-clear-answer-in-debate-on-values/2005/08/25/1124562981813.html?oneclick=true
I’d just like to point out that I wasn’t arrested by the values police this morning for failing to have Vegemite on toast for breakfast, though it was a close call when I mocked the Australian cricket team. I think Mr. Kate is actually a values mole, so I retracted my comments quickly, and said I was joking, but I’m not sure he believes me.
It may have been a mistake, also, admitting that I do not like singing Waltzing Matilda and I have an slight phobia of emus.
If I don’t comment here again you will all know what has happened to me.
Hi, Echelon, did you get all of that?
Nic I used to be able say IRONY but I got rusty with it
Chairman Evil Punditsze….”power proceeds from the barrel of a gun”. Ah, so the Iraqi insurgents are doing the right thing then.
All this talk about Simpson and his Donkey reminded me of this famous exchange from a Monty Python movie:
Arthur: The Lady of the Lake, her arm clad in the purest shimmering samite, held aloft Excalibur from the bosom of the water, signifying by devine providence that I, Arthur, was to carry Excalibur. That is why I’m your king.
Dennis: Listen. Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government. Supreme executive power derives from a mandate from the masses, not from some farcical aquatic ceremony.
Arthur: Be quiet!
Dennis: You can’t expect to weild supreme executive power just because some watery tart threw a sword at you!
While Simson and his Donkey did really exist, I wonder whether the amount of meaning we put on them is not that dissimilar from what Arthur placed on the ‘Lady of the Lake’.
And this is not to discount what Mr. Simpson did. However what makes me uneasy is this ‘narrowing’ of what an Australian is, because it cuts me off. When Simpson was rescuing soldiers my grandfather was fighting on the Southern Front in the Alps against the Austro-Hungarians. Does it means I am a lesser Australian? I have no problems in stating to immigrants that Australia has a set of values and they need to live within them. But when Nelson talks about Simpson and Howard talks about Australians deriving their values with the ANZACS etc. I feel cut off. I am not saying that we should not remember the fallen and the sacrifices they have done, but when the Prime Minister links the values with all hold such a predominantly Anglo/Celtic Australia what about those Australians who do not have that heritage? Where they fit in?
Nelson could well be right.
Simpson had a disregard to authority, treated officers and infantrymen alike.
He didn’t discriminate between tykes and prots and didn’t seek any praise for a job he believed was necessary.
Damned good role model if you ask me.
Guido, if you dropped your ethnic prejudices and instead concentrated on the idea of a role model for all Australians, you wouldn’t feel so “cut off”.
Hello everyone… yes, I’ve changed my name ever so slightly to even less disguise it…
Getting back to Nelson’s quote in the post:
“We donÄôt care where people come from; we donÄôt mind what religion theyÄôve got or what their particular view of the world is. But if you want to be in Australia, if you want to raise your children in Australia, we fully expect those children to be taught and to accept Australian values and beliefs,” he said.
“We want them to understand our history and our culture, the extent to which we believe in mateship and giving another person a hand up and a fair go. And basically, if people donÄôt want to be Australians and they donÄôt want to live by Australian values and understand them, well basically they can clear off.”
Dr Nelson said if the country lost sight of what Simpson and his donkey represented, “then we will lose the direction of the country”. John Simpson Kirkpatrick, carrying wounded soldiers on his donkey, is the iconic image of Gallipoli. “He represents everything at the heart of what it means to be Australian.”
It seems to me that Nelson is trying to articulate some nice fuzzy ideas in a not-very-articulate way, demonstrated by the reference to Simpson and his donkey. While it’s easy to talk about the donkey, it’s better to discuss the idea behind his comments.
Teaching about Australia’s history and culture is an excellent thing – don’t have anything more to say at the moment as I have to get back to work!
‘we believe in mateship and giving another person a hand up and a fair go.’ That’s why we’re screwing all you whinging blue collar bastards with AWA’s which ignore the Award wages which you fought so hard for. If you don’t like it, you are unAustralian and should go and live in another country. Yep, thanks mate.
Mindy, you forgot the second part of that, which says “…then we’ll import more skilled migrants to do the jobs that we should have been skilling Aussies for, except that they’re all dole-bludging union-loving terrorist harboring sorts who aren’t worth spending money on TAFE places for.”
Donkey [nudge, nudge, wink wink]
” Guido: …”but when the Prime Minister links the values with all hold such a predominantly Anglo/Celtic Australia what about those Australians who do not have that heritage? Where they fit in?
Under Howard they don’t, that’s the message from 1996 ”for all of us” meaning the ”wogs”, ”poofs” ,”lesbos” ,”ragheads” and ”darkies” are not part of the anglo-centric mateship club. I thought that was self evident.
I had one uncle, and one great uncle at Gallipoli but that doesn’t make me feel part of the cosy club, far from it. From what I knew of them, and refusal to attend Anzac ceremonies to the best of my knowledge (and one wife still alive at 99 years of age), they indicated a sense of their values to me that people like Nelson and Howard could only be opportunistic secretive racist propagandising scumbags, the likes of which this nation has never seen.
before, or likely to experience in future. (Cozzie being too dumb to carry it off in emulation.)
Fortuitously, the topic in today’s 3rd year Seminar was nationalism and identity and I can report that I sang “God Save the Queen” and all of the students educated in the 90s had heard of Simpson and his Donkey. So Nelson can rest easy about Griffith University.
So Griffith will get their flagpole. Praise be!
We have one – we fly the Griffith flag!
Mind you, students in the two seminar groups from Ireland, Switzerland, France, Brazil, Japan, Singapore, Brunei and America were somewhat bemused at our national hero.
And similarly bemused when I asked what most people did on Australia day – and the response was “got pissed”. Now that’s true blue. Though the Irish student did take the opportunity to become a citizen. She also reports beer is very expensive in Dublin these days.
Four euro (A$6.40ish) a pint, and that’s the cheap pubs. That feckin’ Celtic Tiger has ruined pub culture.
Last night after talking about it with a visiting friend, who was born on Norfolk Island, I have decided to re-read Bob Hughes’ “The Fatal Shore”. Perhaps minister Nelson might want high schools to teach this text to school children.
Of particular usefulness might be the characters Lt. Col James Morisset (“I am the man to keep these scoundrels in order”), and the convict Laurence Frayne who was one of Morisset’s “objects” on Norfolk Island, the “ne plus ultra” of convinct punishment settlements.
Take your pick, either the sadistic commandant of the most brutal torture camp in Australian history or the wild untamable recidivist criminal, not merely a “pebble” but an “iron man”;
An entire place, operating in an almost complete moral vaccuum, fully documented by Georgian gentlemen of impeccable standing, so the likes of Windschuttle and Howard can just shut the f*k up about “black armbands”. Perhaps Nelson ought not to moralise so unctuously and ignorantly about Australian history.
I saw Nelson saying some of this on TV. He is such a nasty piece of work. I honestly couldn’t care less if my child (a sixth generation Australian) ever heard of Simpson. I would much rather he be taught democratic and humanitarian values, not some phoney nationalism. Nelson, minister for education, is setting an awful example for schoolchildren – in a dispute (a perceived dispute) he tells his opponents to either accept his way or ‘clear off’. So much for any kind of civility or negotiation. Nelson is nothing but a bully and thankfully Australian children are being taught not to listen to bullies.
Yes, the last thing on Nelson’s mind, at any time, is education. Any statement, any policy. Its about his future leadership chances, or wedging, whistling and playing the low grade populist angles.
good post Rex. Early settlement history is most instructive. It should never be forgotten that Australia was the world’s first offshore detention centre. Now we export to failed pacific economies. Read Tench’s diary about the arrival of 2nd fleet – a mixed public / private tranportation partnership. It rings down the years: the mortality rate on the private detention ships horrified the local officers in Sydney.
But there’s also positives there. Im not sure how many Australians are aware that Arthur Philip had himself, and the officers on exactly the same rations as the lowest convict during the hungry early years till some form of agriculture was established in the early 1790s. More or less four years of rationing, and no favourites. A form of economic egalitarianism started at year dot of White Australia; through the unlikely vehicle of of a military penal colony.
After Philip, we see the real start of Australian governance – the bagmen otherwise known as the Rum Corps Governors, handing out good land to their mates, maintaiing social control by keeping the plebs on a regulated booze-drip, and hiding the hardening resistance of the Eora and Dharug people from London so they could maintain their pork-barreling authoritarian fiefdom from undue scrutiny. With a few quasi-democratic twists, these were more or less the core principles of governance in NSW and QLD until the 1980s.
Yes, Lefty E, the Rum Corps – what a bunch of sodden buggers they were. Don’t get me started on that scoundrel Macarthur who should have swung from a gibbet for treason rather than being printed on a banknote (the old paper $10 in case anyone forgets).
Never forget that this thieving traitorous and corrupt usurper of the legitimate power of the Crown is the backbone of National Party mythology either.
Sorry for the rant but Captain Bligh is actually one of my personal heroes, the champion of the legitimate rights of Australian free settlers, a veteran of the Nile campaign and an actual hero who accomplished one of the most amazing feats of navigation ever undertaken. Bligh was ten times the man that Macarthur and co. could ever hope to be and yet viciously slandered by them and their rich and powerful interests in London.
You would like Tench, wouldn’t you LE. The first bleeding-heart lefty of white settlement’s officer class.
Rex: yes, Bligh was a legend on the water – from the middle of the Pacific to Dutch Timor in a sloop. Incredible.
But the guy clearly had no people skills. one mutinty is unfortunate, two would seem careless etc…
Liam: Astute parallel noted… But Tench wasn’t the only bleeding heart, but certainly the best writer among them. He was mates with Lt William Dawes, who was even more of a wet. And let’s not forget Philip himself. Bloke actually gets speared by a Cameragal warrior, and still champions racial harmony. A true early Australian role model. Pity about all those that followed.
Hello,
Can anyone tell me what Simpson’s Donkey name was.
(help) kate