And so Australia Day rolls around again, with the usual somewhat half-hearted public controversy over its meaning and significance. Last night, Thomas Keneally told a commemorative “Australian of the Year” event that he was now reconciled to celebrating the day, believing “it has come to stand for a duality of experiences, genesis and loss”.
Clearly not everyone feels the same way: many will mark tomorrow as “invasion day” or “survival day”, and many more will be blissfully unaware of any historical significance at all.
There’s nothing wrong with historical debate, and no reason why everyone should share the same interpretation of their country’s history. But with Australia Day, it seems almost as if the debate (such as it is) is the only historical content there is: that if you took away the celebrity angst, there would be nothing left of the day at all, nothing to mark it out from any other summer holiday.
Contrast, for example, with Anzac Day, which is also the site of historical controversy, but where the controversy takes place against a background commemoration of a real event of real importance. People disagree about its interpretation, but they agree that it means something, and even those who avoid the debate altogether and just enjoy the holiday still mostly understand how it originated.
So here’s a modest suggestion for alleviating some of the Australia Day uneasiness and bringing it more into line with popular expectations: let’s go back to celebrating it by a long weekend, and give up the experiment of a fixed holiday that always falls on January 26.
The fixed-day holiday was a piece of right-wing political correctness from the 1980s and ’90s to boost patriotic sentiment. It was also supported by the business lobby, attracted by the idea of not having to give workers a holiday when the 26th fell on a weekend (a dubious benefit even in its own terms, since it also promotes absenteeism when, like this year, the 26th falls mid-week and workers take off extra days for continuity).
But historical significance can’t be manufactured out of whole cloth. The respect we give Anzac Day isn’t just an artifact of the calendar, any more than the July 4 in the United States or July 14 in France. The fixed holiday can’t disguise the fact that the landing in Sydney Cove is not felt as an occasion of national significance. It would make sense as a local Sydney holiday; as a national day it is purely arbitrary.
Few will want to give up a holiday, and the chance of winning popular support to rename the day or move it to some other time of year seems minimal. We’re stuck with Australia Day. But there’s no reason we have to be stuck with the fixed date that disrupts our planning and often deprives us of a holiday. That represents a recent change, and it could be changed back.
In the old days, Australia Day meant something: the end of the summer holiday period, celebrated with a long weekend so that even those who had been back at work for a couple of weeks could enjoy a bit more holiday spirit, innocent of historical controversy. Would it really be contrary to our national character to try to return it to that?
13 thoughts on “The absurdity that is Australia Day”
Jennifer Nash
January 28, 2010 at 10:24 amMICHAEL ROGERS: Your response is an ad hominem attack. You steer completely clear of the fundamental human rights abuse, judicial corruption and high level political cover up issues my blog raises, while trying to take my issues off course, introduce new issues convenient to you, and personally attack me. It is a straw man fallacy and you are putting words in my mouth.
I posted the blog on the above issues because it is the truth, the full truth and nothing but the truth as witnessed by retired journalists, who have corroborated my criminal allegations with sworn Statutory Declarations and as told on air to former Radio 4BC presenter Chuck Brooks: https://publish.indymedia.org.uk/media/2009/08/435571.mp3
Unlawfully editing courtroom audiotapes and transcripts to pervert the course of justice is a criminal offence punishable with up to five (5) years in jail. Perverting the course of justice is also a criminal offence. Former NSW Federal Court Judge Marcus Einfeld was jailed for two years when he perverted the course of justice on a relatively small charge.
Apropos Federal Court, my son was also denied legal youth advocacy there like other children as I explain here: How the Federal Court of Australia selectively denies The Rights Of The Child https://publish.indymedia.org.uk/en/2009/05/430998.html
You are very interested in my post and have gone to the trouble of googling me to see if you can dig up any dirt you can sling back at me. Your commitment and interest here is astounding.
You are trying to defame me and infer I am xenophobic or racist when I never made any racists or xenophobic remarks because I am neither. Yet cleverly avoid drawing any attention to the real issues concerning my unrepresented son, the victim at the center of the debate, for whom you have shown no compassion or interest.
It is a breach of natural justice and international law to deny an Australian child access to legal youth advocacy on human rights abuses in his very own country in the exact same way as juvenile delinquents, criminals and illegal aliens on equal terms. My drawing attention to this breach is not racism.
That you propose and accept that my innocent Australian born son should be treated less favourably than law breakers is very revealing indeed. And you offer no reason why this should be so and why this is fair and reasonable.
If my story had appeared in the Sunday Mail or Courier Mail et al would you also report back here about all the other stories the Murdoch press publishes and what their political views on any given subject are?
No, of course you would not because that is just so ridiculous!
I am not responsible for the editorial content of Mathaba or any other news agencies anywhere in the world and have absolutely no input or influence on what they say and do. And it is without doubt not my job to comment on these completely unrelated issues, which have absolutely nothing to do with us or the issue at hand, which is human rights abuses.
This is just an attack to make me look bad and responsible for issues, which are clearly totally beyond my control and not at all relevant to my judicial corruption and human rights abuse allegations. I have no idea which Mathaba story you are even referring to as you purposely provided no link to it because it is just so farfetched and you know it.
No one has so far stepped forwarded willing to advocate on the human rights abuses, judicial abuse, judicial corruption, denial of legal youth advocacy vide The International Rights Of The Child, denial of access to public service in our very own country on equal terms, denial of electoral representation by our own Labor MP, John Mickel, the Speaker of Parliament and Attorney General Cameron Dick and denial of attention due to lack of press freedom in Australia.
Commenting on the lack of press freedom, John Hartigan, head of Rupert Murdoch’s Australian operations said on 1 July 2009, “Reporters have become prisoner to government spin and self interest”.
On 11 May 2007, he lamented “News Ltd papers were ordered not to disclose the details of an auditor’s report on politicians rorting their expenses, were not allowed to report which Sydney restaurants failed health inspections, which schools had the worst bullying records, which hospital provided the best health care or which pubs had the worst records of violence. …It’s simply not acceptable”.
While Fairfax CEO, David Kirk said “my concern, quite simply, is that we as a country cannot preserve our democracy if we destroy the institutions that serve our democracy.”
Despite the apathy I am still hoping one day soon, an Australian millionaire or billionaire philanthropist or other good man or good woman with nothing to fear due to their wealth or position in society, will step forward and will advocate for my son and expose this fraud and high level political cover-up for what it is.
Being forced to advocate for my son because the rule of law has repeatedly broken down is very exhausting, time consuming, unfair and a difficult thing to do for a layperson like me without legal or journalistic training.
The government’s persistent silence and refusal to publicly acknowledge and comment on my corruption allegations by pretending we do not even exist, speaks volumes to my credibility and the veracity of our claims.
They are probably the main reason The Wall Street Journal Online and many others have published my citizen journalist articles several times. Silence speaks a thousand words.
“Equal treatment before the law is a pillar of democratic societies. When courts are corrupted by greed or political expediency, the scales of justice are tipped, and ordinary people suffer. Judicial corruption means the voice of the innocent goes unheard, while the guilty act with impunity” said Huguette Labelle, Chair of Transparency International.
Charles Richardson
January 29, 2010 at 9:38 amJust to clarify – I don’t moderate these discussions, so it wasn’t me that let that last one through.
Jennifer Nash
January 30, 2010 at 3:10 pmCHARLES RICHARDSON: I sincerely apologise to you if my comment caused any embarrassment or offence to you and would like to assure you this was never my intention at all.
It is perfectly understandable that you may perhaps not be entirely happy about such unpleasant and such controversial things being posted in response to your Australia Day article.
Particularly, when you aren’t able to moderate the webpage, and have no editorial control over the comments as you have correctly pointed out. However, if the appropriate channels worked correctly and if the public ‘servants’ who gave their public oath of office to represent their constituents as per the Westminster system did the job entrusted to them properly, I would not have to write any citizen journalist articles and blog comments.
I would very much prefer a professional legal youth advocate; my local MP who is the Speaker of Parliament and the Queensland Attorney General would advocate and draw attention to the human rights abuses affecting my son.
He should not have to rely on an inexperienced layperson like me. I wish things were very different. I am truly sorry.