same ol' mumbo jumbo?

I've waited till the end of the day to download Ampe Akelyernemane Meke Mekarle Little Children are Sacred, and print all 320 or so pages on recycled paper.  I'm starting to collate and sift through some of the media commentary accompanying this report.

I'm rather entertained -- if that's the right or appropriate word -- by Guy Rundle's response to this report in Crikey yesterday (the only one I could access via the squatter's issue -- perhaps they only give you the flakey ones).  Rundle opens with a rather clever sleight-of-hand, quoting an extract from Henry Mayhew’s London Labour And The London Poor (1851), which he presents as a citation from the Report itself.  The idea is to 'flag the veiled racism of despair in much commentary on the report', while protesting the resilience of Aboriginal culture.

It's worth quoting a slab of Rundle's justification for this manoeuvre:

The sad fact is that every people caught between two worlds, two eras, suffer these horrors. The ‘London poor’ were those who had been thrown off rural land in the 18th and 19th centuries, pouring into the cities as factory fodder. They’d lost a way of life and not yet gained a new one.

Aborigines are in the same predicament. So are people in East European cities like Kishinev, Moldova, where the 12-year-old crack whores will pester you all the way from the station to your hotels. Or half a hundred other places across the globe.

Bad enough this is happening, worse that people are pretending it can be solved quickly, or that the report’s release will make any major difference. Thus Nicholas Rothwell, whose work veers between good sense and received wisdom:

A LINE has been drawn in troubled sand. A taboo, long and artfully maintained, stands broken. From this day on, no one can say they do not know how deep the nightmare is in remote Aboriginal Australia, or how urgent the need.

Empty pointless rhetoric. Most people will never hear about it and few will care for more than the space of a news bulletin....

What we will get is more squalor pornography -- thousands of words poured forth detailing this rape that beating at this camp this settlement, jaded playwrights and novelists making flying visits to cart away a bit of homegrown horror. The ostensible purpose will be to expose terrible conditions for which we are all etc, the real effect is to make people reading the Saturday papers feel good about their own lives. Catharsis sells, as does an implicit sense of racial superiority.

And then we'll get the accusations. Here's Rothwell again:

The sheer scale of the problem, which seems to speak so strongly of a willed cultural suicide ...

What self-satisfied crap! Yes, whole societies lie down and die -- though few ever do completely -- but there's nothing willed about it. It's a universal despairing human response to loss of cultural meaning and anyone who thinks they'd be immune from it in similar circumstances should think again.

I must say I found this vaguely refreshing, as I'm sick of the parsimony that accompanies the fly-in, fly-out journalism on these issues.  I think he's fairly much on the money here, especially when it comes to the Australian's rather sanctimonious stranglehold on reporting on Indigenous Australia.  And sure, Aboriginal cultures are resilient and survive in many forms, though more encouragement is and has been given for Aboriginality to survive within assimilatory contexts.

But I'm rather less enamoured by Rudnle's solutions, which I found rather studenty:

Nevertheless, Rothwell is right (and polite) about the report's recommendations, which are useless and the sort of thing public servants would come up with -- top-down self-surveillance and self-pathologisation, better education etc etc.

But there was no way the report could recommend anything useful. Having made visible the problem in all its appalling detail, its use is at an end.

Saying what Aborigines need to do is easier than anyone white or black making it so, and is not for the likes of me. But as a general rule one can say that afflicted peoples need militant action, both to make change and to restore a sense of purpose. Under that strategy, if liquor stores keep selling to remote communities then burn them down, as Carrie Nation and other militant temperance socialists smashed up 19th century gin shops with axes. If people are involved in child-sex prostitution, chase them out of town. If they're white, do something rather worse.

That sort of stuff really needs a leadership more in the style of a Mao, a Fanon or a Guevara than is currently on offer. And maybe there are other ways. And I'm a long way from the front line. But to be honest I can't see anything else giving you much change out of another 40 years.

Militant Marxism isn't dead, it seems. Yeah, bomb the grog shops on Gap Road; we could do with some more violence up my end of town.  Does Rundle really believe this stuff? (Isn't the man a little too old for fiery armchair Marxism these days?)  And isn't this stuff all a bit old hat, like, y'know, C19th, the stuff of Anne Bronte novels?

I am with him, though, about the public service mumbo jumbo. Flicking through this Report, my eyes did indeed begin to glaze over at the familiar litany of whole-of-government, improved service delivery, intersectoral collaboration, blah blah. One of the reasons why I left the public service, and then community organisations, was because of the slowness with which they moved on these issues.  In part, I felt they were frozen, overwhelmed by the circumstances they had to deal with; in other ways, too enmeshed in local politics to put their necks on the line.  There's no doubt, as Rundle suggests, that new, less cautious leadership is needed; goodness knows, what hasn't the government done to suppress the Aboriginal leadership over the past ten years, with the exception of those who followed its tune?

I suspect there's a certain sense in which the Report doesn't tell us anything we already don't know, though it does substantially document the issue, hopefully providing more ammunition for dealing with recalcitrant governments. I don't feel I can comment adequately on its recommendations, having only browsed through them.  The media coverage accompanying the Report places much of the blame for abuse on the prevalence of alcohol (not surprisingly, given that the role the chair of the committee has played in Aboriginal health organisations); I'll be interested to see if 'culture' gets a look-in, after the Nowra tract.  But if the Report's findings seem repetitive, it may well be because like many things in Indigenous affairs, the solutions are outstanding; they have been known for years and have not been acted upon.  In the meantime, things are deteriorating. You could rattle the plough-shares or lob a few molotov cocktails, but at the end of the day, once the inflammatory media coverage was over (cf. Redfern, Dubbo, Palm Island), you'd be left with the same ol', same ol' story about why action hasn't been taken, why discriminatory treatment of Aboriginal people still exists when it comes to the delivery of various services, etc.

Comments

[Adam]

I like your reading of Rundle's piece. I think that it's probably not a call that he can make - for more a militant Abl politics. It's a nice idea, or perhaps just a nice image, but I think I'd prefer it if it were taken to Canberra as opposed to down the road from your place. That's where there's some genuine complacency that needs to have the fear of god put into it. Still, not my call.

I think there is a fair bit of viable leadership around the place, but the problem that you identify about the lack of recognition from government is a huge one. I mean, communities can hold out on agreements or 99-year leases, but if that's all that's being put on the table, the strength of that gesture quickly subsides into survival, patience etc.

I noticed that Noel Pearson was getting air time on the ABC tonight. Plenty of footage of him and Mr Brough. There was some talk of suspending welfare payments, or something, I think. It's only a matter of time before it gets punitive, I guess.

[elsewhere]

Later, watching the 7.30 Report, I'm struck by how WASPish Noel Pearson's language and preoccupations are in his sales pitch for his own 300-page report, released this week. He speaks of getting off the grog (again), ending passive welfare (again), and now establishing a family commission to make sure parents parent properly. My Presbyterian forbears couldn't have put it better themselves, but then, Pearson *was* a Lutheran mission boy.

****

Driving through country at Y-community with S a couple of months ago, S painted a fairly *functional* picture of life during the mission times out in central Australia. People were fed and clothed; they were gainfully employed to some extent. They were able to go bush and participate in cultural practices -- to a certain extent.

'So, what did the missions have going for them? What was the vital element they had that we don't have now?' I asked.

'Coercion,' S said wryly.

****

The idea of using force, whether soft or heavy-gloved, is implicit in Pearson and Rundle's solutions: coercion; provocation; violence. Doesn't anyone have any better solutions?

At the end of the 7.30 Report interview, Pearson says, 'Some day we're going to get a convergence of Mabo and welfare reform.'

I don't believe that Pearson won't already have articulated for himself what that convergence will be. I imagine that one day at some politically artful moment, he'll unveil whatever his 'solution' might be, in accordance with the peccadilloes of the political leardership of the day.

Myself, I'd be guessing that the linkage would be self-government, but even that's a dirty word these days.

[nick cetacean]

Well, I must admit to coming to your blog to find a potted solution to Australia's most difficult problem...

"There's no doubt, as Rundle suggests, that new, less cautious leadership is needed; goodness knows, what hasn't the government done to suppress the Aboriginal leadership over the past ten years, with the exception of those who followed its tune?"

But didn't Abl leadership throw up the likes of GC?

"One of the reasons why I left the public service, and then community organisations, was because of the slowness with which they moved on these issues."

But when the PS 'moves quickly' isn't that more likely to result in top-down solutions and even coercion?

"But if the Report's findings seem repetitive, it may well be because like many things in Indigenous affairs, the solutions are outstanding; they have been known for years and have not been acted upon. In the meantime, things are deteriorating... you'd be left with the same ol', same ol' story about why action hasn't been taken, why discriminatory treatment of Aboriginal people still exists when it comes to the delivery of various services, etc."

What are these solutions and why haven't they been undertaken?

I'm not being provocative -- genuinely asking your opinion here because I don't get it...

[Adam]

"The idea of using force, whether soft or heavy-gloved, is implicit in Pearson and Rundle's solutions: coercion; provocation; violence. Doesn't anyone have any better solutions?"

I mean, there is an argument that violence is already substantively in the system - both epistemic and physical. Not that I think anyone should be picking up AK47s, but I might understand* it if someone did.

*Note: 'understand' not meaning 'support'.

[elsewhere]

Yes, true -- there is a history of bureaucratic and psychological violence implicit in the system.

>Well, I must admit to coming to your blog to find a potted solution to Australia's most difficult problem...But when the PS 'moves quickly' isn't that more likely to result in top-down solutions and even coercion?But didn't Abl leadership throw up the likes of GC?<

Um yeah, ATSIC was a bit like the Sopranos without the guns (an insider speaks -- and just as funny). The ATSIC Board was unwise to vote GC in as Chair; and they let Sugar maintain a stranglehold on things he shouldn't have been allowed to have.

But ATSIC was also unfairly vilified by the media. Lower down, away from the showpony level, at the Regional Council level there were many quiet achievers and solid performers who wanted to make a difference to their communities (and in the case of Victoria, set up men's groups and anti-FV programs -- there's a lot of unrecognised work).

Every government/institution throws up a few bad eggs -- after all, didn't the American electorate vote for the likes of George Bush? Didn't the Australian electorate vote for the likes of John Howard? I don't think what happened to ATSIC is reason enough for Aboriginal people to be denied democratic rights in appointing their own leaders, developing their own governance systems.

Since getting rid of ATSIC, the government has just appointed their stooges in other positions. It's all been part of a long-term agenda. There's only space for dissident voices these days. Interesting to see if Ruddy will leave as is or change things.

have to run...
our internet's been down all day, I've only gotten in just now

[elsewhere]

Actually, there's more...Typepad must have a word limit on comments as it cut this out of the original:

Nick, I don't really have the space/time to reply to your questions in detail (and i can understand your frustration). But what i was trying to get at is that many of the solutions listed in documents like the latest NT and Cape York have been repeated ad nauseum in other state and national level reports but (as Rundle is saying too), attempts to implement them have been piss-weak at best. I mean, you can look back at reports from the 70s and 80s and find what would seem to be cutting edge discussions of education and employment, for example, and still find their recommendations quite valid for now, because only fairy steps have been taken since then.

I think that documents like Recognition, Rights and Reform produced by CAR, ATSIC and the Social Justice Commissioner in 1995 do set out a good proforma for 'meaningful reconciliation' at symbolic and practical levels in this country. (You could go to the ATSI Social Justice Commissioner's report for continued reporting in this vein: http://www.humanrights.gov.au/social_justice/index.html) But to take 'practical reconciliation' issues as an example (tho these inevitably intersect with what might seem like more 'symbolic' issues such as preservation of languages in relation to education) -- there are access issues in relation to education, employment, housing and health that need to be addressed to ensure equality. These things are also basic citizen entitlements. There has been much ink spilt in reports and program design on these. But in many cases, progress has been sytmied by the recalcitrance of various levels of government to act on these things -- here in Alice, the housing issue isn't only held up by Mal Brough's gaffes and blunders; it's held up by a local council that panders to the racist views of some of its constituency, so that it will continued to be re-elected etc. (You see, this is why I need to write the book -- not enough space in these posts for anything to make sense.)

[elsewhere]

Speaking of top-down interventions, I hope y'all saw this:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2007/06/21/1957945.htm

I'm divided; I think the NT and local govts have been piss-weak on these issues because they're too enmeshed in the politics of the context.

It is a situation that demands a response. But aspects of this
do sound like finding a backdoor entry for rolling back land rights.

[Adam]

It scares the shit out of me, to put it frankly. A lot of talk over at LP about this one. It's not just about rolling back land rights either, there's a lot of civil rights rollbacks there as well. I don't know how some of it is going to be legal, and I hope there are challenges.

[ThirdCat]

Elsewhere, I thought I should let you know, I do read these posts (sometimes several times) I just don't know what to say so I never leave a comment (except that I am now, but you know what I mean).

[elsewhere]

That's ok, in fact, it's very nice of you. I'm probably writing these posts to work out my own thoughts on things, as much as anything else.

[Jonathan]

I'm reading too - thanks for doing your working out i public.