2019-07-04
By Chris Johansen, Green Issue Co-editor
Responding to the Christchurch Massacre, and the consequent Easter bombings in Sri Lanka, The School of Media, Creative Arts and Social Inquiry, Curtin University and The Museum of Freedom and Tolerance, WA conducted a forum entitled ‘One of Us?’ at the State Library on 2nd May. The forum essentially examined what led the Christchurch gunman, of Australian nationality, to express his dislike of ‘others’, namely Muslims, in such a violent manner. It then more generally evaluated the state of racism in Australia and the forces of ‘othering’.
The forum consisted of two panel discussions, led by those pictured, and moderated by human rights lawyer Rabia Siddique. Panel 1 reflected on the present situation and Panel 2 addressed possible ways forward.
Recent experiences of racism related by some of the panel members cast my mind back to my early days, in the 50s and 60s. Being white and even half Anglo I never experienced racism directed at me, but observed it being focussed on others. At primary school the usual victims were children of recently arrived migrants from southern Europe, during and after WW2. These children were distinguishable by particular physical features and food habits, and called all sorts of obnoxious names that I could not possibly print here.
There were no Aboriginals at my primary school (Mosman Park). They were only to be found on the fringes of suburbia or country towns and were fair game for all manner of discrimination and racial abuse. They were not even recognized as fellow ‘people’ until the 1967 Referendum, and even then some 20% of WA voters voted ‘no’.
In 1963 I joined anti-apartheid protests against the visiting South African rugby team. I was the recipient of, to put mildly, some rather strong abuse, obviously from folks who thought that apartheid was a good idea.
There were very few people of African or Asia origin in Perth in the 50s and 60s and, ironically, those that were here were not unduly discriminated against. They were either students or otherwise here on a temporary basis and, although obviously ‘other’, were not considered as a ‘threat’ as they would be leaving the country. The ‘threat’ prompting antagonism came from those recent southern European migrants and Aboriginals who were not going anywhere.
The main point is that Australia is emerging from a dark history of blatant racism, which was progressively even worse going backwards through time from the 1950s. From the 70s, however, there has obviously been movement towards a multicultural society, but still with a long way to go. Thus racism is not increasing in the sense of reverting to overall societal attitudes prevalent some 50 years ago.
Nevertheless, in Australia, as indeed in most societies, pockets of xenophobic chauvinism remain, where nationalism is spruiked and distinct minority groups are vilified as enemies of society. What leads to such xenophobia, often resulting in blatant racism, religious persecution or belittling of a minority group? I suggest that it is an underlying inferiority complex inducing practitioners to show that they are superior to someone else. This could come about through economic deprivation or a heartless upbringing. But I’ll leave that diagnosis to proper psychologists.
Unfortunately, these pockets of xenophobia are exploited by some politicians – those who use that old political trick of creating an enemy, even if there isn’t one, and claiming to be the best person or party to protect society from that enemy. This has happened with Islamophobia, particularly since 9/11, and the ‘stop the boats’ (full of dark-skinned ‘others’) movement in Australia. Wider political support for their views in turn encourages xenophobes to become more overt in their assertions and behaviour.
Another important factor encouraging xenophobes is the rise of social media, where it is possible to proliferate all manner of insult and abuse anonymously. The forum pointed out that those controlling these media (e.g. Facebook, Twitter) have been reluctant to close addresses with the most obnoxious of commentary.
Supporters of public expression of the most extreme of xenophobia claim that they are merely exercising their democratic right to ‘free speech’. In any society, or grouping of humans, if they are to continue living together reasonably harmoniously, there needs to be limits on the degree of public insult. I interpret what present-day advocates of ‘free speech’ really mean is the right to denigrate their chosen targets with impunity. However, when even moderate criticism is returned to them they seem to get unduly upset and demand retaliatory, and even legal, action against it. They complain of ‘political correctness’ stifling their right to denigrate their targets.
I noticed that several of the forum speakers of non-Anglo/Euro background physically or verbally winced at the assertion of Australia being a multicultural society. From this forum and experiences elsewhere it is clear that those who are on the receiving end of racism are best able to assess the extent of racism in society. Those who are not often do not think there is a problem, and sometimes think of those who do as being over-sensitive.
Although Australia has moved a long way in 50 years in that different racial groups are now allowed to actually live here – i.e. an evolution from the White Australia Policy operating prior to then – I’m afraid that it still has a way to go before it can be classified as harmoniously multicultural. For a start, we are yet to achieve reasonable reconciliation with Indigenous Australians – e.g. still ignoring, or opposing, the Uluru Statement from the Heart and the idea of ‘Treaties’. Neo-Nazi, racist-type groups are becoming more overt, fanned by social media ‘free speech’ and positive feedback from some politicians. In particular, Islamophobia has clearly increased in Australia over the last 20 years, despite only a very few Muslims in Australia being in any way associated with terrorist events.
As a case in point, Australian media made little use of the word terrorist in relation to the Christchurch gunman; they referred to him as mentally disturbed and tried to search for reasons/excuses for his actions. On the other hand any Muslim committing an atrocity is immediately labelled as a religion-inspired terrorist, even if closer examination indicates mental disturbance of an individual.
In general, the forum acknowledged a rising trend of xenophobia in Australia and a more overt expression of racism in particular – moving in the opposite direction of harmonious multiculturalism. What to do about this? A good starting point was considered to be Jacinda Adern’s New Zealand, and her reaction to the Christchurch massacre. She immediately invoked inclusive language with respect to the victims, with extensive use of ‘us’ and ‘we’. She spelled out New Zealand’s collective sense of purpose, to distance it to the opposite end of the spectrum in relation to the gunman’s sentiments.
Speakers acknowledged that Australian society is really unskilled at dealing with our own aversions and long-held prejudices. Political leadership, like in New Zealand, is needed in this regard, not the behaviour in Australia of recent years of trying to gain political advantage by giving oxygen to xenophobic forces. It was suggested that the philosophies of neoliberalism and capitalism promote ‘otherness’ by emphasizing human differences – these philosophies suppose that it is inevitable that some will be economically advanced while others will languish, and that is as it should be.
However, long-held societal attitudes change only slowly. Australia was colonized by the British over 200 years ago, a race that had overt delusions of grandeur. While these delusions seem to have largely dissipated in the home country, they seem to be dissipating more slowly here among the descendants of the colonizers. This process really needs to be kicked along if we are to achieve harmonious multiculturalism. To do this racial, religious and other forms of xenophobia need to be rigorously called out whenever they raise their heads, especially by political leaders but also by each of us.
Header photo: Smoking ceremony prior to the ‘One of Us’ forum, presided over by Uncle Ben Taylor (on chair). Chris Johansen
Upper text photo: Panel 1, comprising (from left) Sabah Rind, Ayman Qwaider, Sky Croeser and Kim Scott. Chris Johansen
Lower text photo: Panel 2, comprising (from left) Fadzi Whande, Imam Yahya Ibrahim, Marilyn Metta and Yirga Woldeyes (Chair). Chris Johansen
[Opinions expressed are those of the author and not official policy of Greens WA]