>>And do Australian (republican) patriots dream of writing their own
>>Constitution? Of being the (always-capitalized) Founders of a new nation?
ironically, it's our blurry monarchist Prime Minister who is wallowing in the fantasy of being the author of the nation. Out of the blue he announced that he was going to write a new preamble for the Aust Constitution, with the help of his good friend Les Murray, bad poet of the rural-idiocy right. It's been fun and games ever since (see below).
Australian republicans are way too busy going on about "the need to have an Australian head of state", endlessly spitting out the question: "do you really want a foreigner as the head of australia?" -- who's answer is self-evident only if you are a chauvinist prick, imho. ironically, the man of the republican moment (Malcolm Turnbull) is a merchant banker, specialising in junk bonds no less, a charlatan of global finance. the other republican pin-up boy, McGuire, is the host of a football show which recently did a 'thing' parodying an indigenous footballer with one of their panelists wearing 'blackface'...
Kelley wrote:
>bzzzzt. ahistorical analysis. fershame Doug. why on earth would there
>need be such commotion in Australia. they already have a nationalized
>identity, a curious one too from what I've read on these here lists. goes
>something like this: [sheep, convicts, alcoholism, lamingtons...]
mmm. bears little relationship to my experience. you're thinking Anglo-Irish, which is not only anachronistic, but leaning towards the offensive. as to 'ahistorical analysis': I think Doug might be closer to the mark than Kelley.
nationalism in Australia has always been anxious and tenuous, precisely because there is no privileged event of authorship. this anxiety makes at times for a quite vicious (because panicky) nationalism, but at other times means we aren't deluged by fantasies of self-coherence, self-authorship, etc. -- which is a good thing I think. I dread the time when The Australian Nation becomes sacralised. Australians tend to think most yanks are weird on this, it makes us uncomfortable... this whole thread makes me uneasy: I feel like I'm in the presence of believers...
Angela --- rcollins at netlink.com.au
--------------------------------------- http://www.theaustralian.com.au/index.asp?URL=/national/4362756.htm
Preamble a war of word
By RICHARD McGREGOR The Australian 30apr99
JOHN Howard says he is willing to make changes to his constitutional preamble, but indicated yesterday he would not bow to opposition demands to include a reference to prior Aboriginal "custodianship" of Australia. [...] "I am willing to look at changes but I am not willing to propose something that will lose support in other sections of the community," Mr Howard said on Adelaide radio. He said he did not believe that "custodianship" implied ownership of land, but that "a lot of people of goodwill are concerned about that and I respect their views". Labor legal affairs spokesman Robert McClelland said yesterday there was "no reasonable basis" for excluding custodianship. "In the absence of any proof that a significant group of Australians hold this opinion, one is entitled to question the genuineness of the Prime Minister's statements on this issue," he said. "Any dictionary will show that the concept of custody is not the same as ownership."
http://www.theage.com.au/daily/990430/news/news6.html Howard admits threat to preamble By GERVASE GREENE CANBERRA The Age
The Prime Minister, Mr John Howard, yesterday acknowledged that there might be no referendum on a new preamble to the Constitution after non-government parties endorsed an alternative draft preamble. Mr Howard accused the coalition's opponents of jeopardising the only opportunity to have Aborigines acknowledged in the Constitution. [...] The Opposition yesterday condemned Mr Howard's determination to have his preamble put to voters, describing it as a "take it or leave it'' expression of arrogance.
http://www.smh.com.au/news/9903/30/pageone/pageone10.html Tuesday, March 30, 1999 Warning: It's mate-eat-mate in the workplace
By MICHELLE GRATTAN, Chief Political Correspondent Sydney Morning Herald
"Aussie mateship" is breaking down in the community just as the Prime Minister is trying to enshrine it in the Constitution, says the ANOP pollster, Mr Rod Cameron. "The idea of sticking to your mates, if not already dead, is certainly taking a hammering when it comes to the workplace," Mr Cameron told the Australian Industry Group (AIG) conference in Canberra yesterday. "Employees have never competed so ruthlessly against each other for jobs and money. Loyalty between employer and employee is being eroded across the board and many young Australians don't experience it." Mr Cameron, formerly the ALP's pollster, also said that despite continuing positive economic news, "when ... ANOP listens to the views of Australians, the cheering is strangely and surprisingly muted. Uncertainty about the future outweighs any gratitude for, or even acknowledgement of, the current good economic news." Coming through the focus groups recently conducted for the AIG was what Mr Cameron described as "the OK ... buts". They said things like "So, the economy is meant to be in good shape. OK. But ... I'm still struggling", "So, unemployment is meant to be falling. OK. But my job isn't safe ..." "While Australia may be enjoying economic prosperity as a nation ... many Australians feel that they are still struggling and that they have received little recognition or reward for their contribution to a more productive and competitive Australia." Australians "are becoming increasingly self-centred. There is little focus on the big issues and on the overall national good." Individualism was resurgent. "Never before has the Australian outlook been so dominated by concern for self and immediate family. "There has been a 'dumbing down' in middle Australia. Macro-economic issues are off the agenda of the general public." Mr Cameron blamed the Howard Government. "They are off the agenda largely because the Government has stopped forcing them on to that agenda. "With the exception of the goods and services tax, the Government is no longer trying to educate the Australian people about the need for continuing reform, and even on the GST question, the doubts are again growing as to whether a new tax is really a reform at all." Briefly in the late 1980s and early 1990s "ANOP was finding that some issues of macro-economics did permeate through to become topics of backyard conversations at Blacktown or Moorabbin. Years when concerns about the debt, the deficit and the balance of payments really did reach ordinary voters. "Times have changed. Around the barbecue, the discussion is all about 'my situation' and the family income, not the importance of wages policy; 'my home loan rate' not the role of monetary policy in controlling economic growth." Mr Cameron suggested politicians were taking too much notice of pollsters' messages. "When opinion pollsters report the community view, the easiest political response is to tell back to the people what they have previously told the pollster. The people are sick of change. So the politician stops talking about change and, more significantly, stops explaining the need for change."