Where's the Clamour?
Last night John Pilger was interviewed on LateLine by Tony Jones concerning the introduction of anti-terrorism laws in Australia.
If we're talking about terrorism, left off the debate, left out of the debate, is state terrorism. The fact that Australia enthusiastically joined a rapacious, illegal attack on a defenceless country in which tens of thousands of people died. That under international law, under the Nuremberg enactment that formed the basis for international law all those years ago, that is an illegal, rapacious and an act, in effect, of terrorism. Why is that not included in the debate on terrorism, because in the end state terrorism absolutely dwarfs the Al Qaeda variety, which is minuscule compared with the kind of bloodshed and suffering and attack that has gone on in Iraq.
...But these laws are a provocation. Worse, they are the beginning of a kind of democratic police state. That may sound dramatic, but, you know, the most basic freedoms always go in a very quiet and insidious way. [Full Transcipt]
This interview reminded me of how conservative our debate is in Australia. Aunty is forced to call home to find an articulate dissenting voice. Where is the clamour and cry of the people?
If we're talking about terrorism, left off the debate, left out of the debate, is state terrorism. The fact that Australia enthusiastically joined a rapacious, illegal attack on a defenceless country in which tens of thousands of people died. That under international law, under the Nuremberg enactment that formed the basis for international law all those years ago, that is an illegal, rapacious and an act, in effect, of terrorism. Why is that not included in the debate on terrorism, because in the end state terrorism absolutely dwarfs the Al Qaeda variety, which is minuscule compared with the kind of bloodshed and suffering and attack that has gone on in Iraq.
...But these laws are a provocation. Worse, they are the beginning of a kind of democratic police state. That may sound dramatic, but, you know, the most basic freedoms always go in a very quiet and insidious way. [Full Transcipt]
This interview reminded me of how conservative our debate is in Australia. Aunty is forced to call home to find an articulate dissenting voice. Where is the clamour and cry of the people?
posted by Jeff at 12:10 pm
3 Comments:
Don't know about you, but I was watching the Ashes, learning Greek, drinking coffee and playing with my new niece Sounds a bit flippant I know, but that's the problem isn't it? The rest just slips by in a headline or a news report that gets left behind in my otherwise busy (?) schedule.
Next thing I know I wake up and I'm in Howard's McCarthyite wetdream where Islam is unAustralian, dissent is reduced to a National senator squabbling over the price of telstra and terror is when others do unto us as we do unto them?
And then I wonder what to do next? Get organised? Agitate?
Or get the next assignment handed in that's due tomorrow?
Surely it's not asking too much for a decent alternative political leadership to gather around? What happened to the opposition (of any shading)? We just need something/someone to gather frustration and political dissent into a viable alternative.
Hmm... well I think Pilger has got it all wrong. First of all, he uses words like 'rapacious' - that's bad, isn't it?
Second, in all he says, what is there for us to be scared of?
Move to Howard's* comments on the average Australian. Happy. Proud. Family Values. And he didn't say, but I'm sure he believes, we're scared.
It seems to me that empathy has short arms - Do you think it can globalise as does economics and politics? In some ways, I really do feel like what Pilger is talking about is 'Collateral Damage'. It's a very distant thing, emotionally. Takes alot to worry about that kind of thing when interest rates are going up, and there are threats being made on our very own soil (clamour, clamour).
I heard Jared Diamond on Radio National (RN podcasts are very rock 'n' roll). He mentioned something about those societies that fail being the ones in which the wealthy are able to protect themselves from the declining quality of the environment. Be it with the environment, war, or human rights, we wouldn't want it any other way, would we?
*who thinks short arms are perfectly delightful.
How does a short armed man like John Howard embrace anything other than himself?*
Does that mean we have to enter a waring nuclear holocaust, experience devestating climactic changes from environmental abuse or have all access to freedoms and rights stripped away before we see a shift towards a more just Australia?
It's just that once a lot of these freedoms are gone, I don't see them coming back! That's what I'm scared of and that's what we all should be scared of.
Perhaps there are cycles of change in politics. How long will this winter last?
*Now, that's not saying all short armed people can't embrace ... I'm quite an admirer of a short arm myself.
Post a Comment
<< Home