Fun Stuff > CHATTER

patriotism/nationalism

<< < (21/44) > >>

Ozymandias:
Man. The whole response to that that "I didn't do anything wrong personally, the government shouldn't have apologized." basically made me think that Australia was full of dicks, except for the prime minister who was finally a big enough dude to not be a dick about it. I mean, given the enormity of the dicklishness that the initial act was, you don't consider it to be the same trend of dickery to say "I don't support any government who admits that that was a dickhole move and apologizes?"

Dicks.

est:
Caspian, it's not about apologising for something that we ourselves have done, but the government admitting that in the past it acted in a way that was Not Very Nice.  When Rudd said sorry he wasn't saying it on a personal level, he was acting on behalf of the government.  There has been no governmental admission of this in the past, it has been more like "oh, get over it", which is a remarkably insensitive and damaging position to take.

Caspian:

--- Quote --- Starting the Apology - From Paul Keating

We non-Aboriginal Australians should perhaps remind ourselves that Australia once reached out for us. Didn't Australia provide opportunity and care for the dispossessed Irish? The poor of Britain? The refugees from war and famine and persecution in the countries of Europe and Asia? Isn't it reasonable to say that if we can build a prosperous and remarkably harmonious multicultural society in Australia, surely we can find just solutions to the problems which beset the first Australians - the people to whom the most injustice has been done.

And, as I say, the starting point might be to recognise that the problem starts with us non-Aboriginal Australians. It begins, I think, with the act of recognition. Recognition that it was we who did the dispossessing. We took the traditional lands and smashed the traditional way of life. We brought the disasters. The alcohol. We committed the murders. We took the children from their mothers. We practised discrimination and exclusion.

It was our ignorance and our prejudice. And our failure to imagine these things being done to us. With some noble exceptions, we failed to make the most basic human response and enter into their hearts and minds. We failed to ask - how would I feel if this were done to me? As a consequence, we failed to see that what we were doing degraded all of us.

[Part of Prime Minister Paul Keating's speech at Redfern, December 1992]
--- End quote ---

gospel:
@OP

I think Nationalism in the sense of nation-states is still a solid concept. There are, obviously, lines that are blurred like PLO, terrorists, etc. But, in the end, every Nation-State looks out for their own and teaches their own rhetoric. Every, every country indoctrinates with the notion that they are the best nation, have done things the best, etc. Every textbook is written for their own countries. America, my fatherland, is guilty of thi--but is not exclusive by a long shot.  So, no, it's pretty alive.

I think what a lot of people are confusing for racism is actually just xenophobia. For example, take the French mockery that's pretty prevalent here. I don't think people are saying people of French decent are innately inferior, but are simply making comments--albeit ignorant--on the French culture. If there was a term for culturaist I'd use that.

To be honest, America does pretty well as far as race goes. It's bad, yes. But, our aspirations are pretty high too. Racism is everywhere, in every country, and I'll ROFL at you if you think that there's any innocent, color-blind countries. This doesn't mean, though, we shouldn't aspire to be better.

I am of Korean (if you ask which one I'll stab you) decent. This is what I consider to be my motherland. Being bi-cultural has given me a pretty unique perspective on things. I can see the flaws in both cultures, and I see a lot in my mother country. Aside from the work ethic, and sympathy for the years of devastation Korea has gone through, I"m honestly pretty ashamed. I'm proud that it coudl go from the second lowest GDP int he world to a Top 10 country. But, the social and welfare issues are 50-years behind.

est:
I admit that I didn't know Keating had given an apology, but how does that change the underlying intent of Rudd's apology?  I haven't ever heard anything about Keating's speech, despite having a mother who works pretty closely with local indigenous community groups.  I am not sure it had the same effect that Rudd's speech was intended to have.  Also, the years of Liberal govt between Keating's speech and Rudd's speech had basically given the finger to indigenous people (well, all Australians really, but Howard's attitude toward the stolen generation really was quite shit) which would have wiped out whatever gains the Keating apology made.

I mean, if you want to bring shit like that up Hawke also tried his hand at the whole reconciliation bit but it was a rather half-hearted attempt, leaving many indigenous people feeling exploited by the whole affair.

Oh also, please note that I am not saying that Rudd's latest effort isn't merely a political play.  Only time will be able to show if he's being genuine or not, unfortunately.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page