Abbott – Pieces of Resistance

Colonisation was not ‘a good thing’

24 January 201824 January 2018 by Ashley

There is currently a debate in Australia about holding Australia Day on 26 January, the anniversary of the arrival of the First Fleet – the first shipment of colonists and convicts from Great Britain, who founded the colony of New South Wales in 1788 – and whether Australia Day should be moved to another date.

Australia Day is supposed to be a day on which all Australians celebrate as a national community. However, 26 January marks the day the British began colonising an already inhabited land, and not all descendants of those indigenous people feel 26 January is a day to celebrate.

Although a recent poll found many Australians would not mind if the date changed,¹ the defence of keeping the date as 26 January is led by the Murdoch media and its allies – most notably conservative politicians like former Prime Minister Tony Abbott.

On 23 January 2018, Abbott made this statement regarding Australia Day:

I would argue that what happened on the January 26, 1788 was on balance for everyone, Aboriginal people included, a good thing because it brought Western civilisation to this country, it brought Australia into the modern world.

Australia was not brought into the modern world; European settlers from the other side of the globe forcefully and violently brought the modern world to Australia. Western civilisation, at that time based on a settler-colonial system which exploited indigenous populations in India, the Americas, Africa, and Asia, was forced onto the Aboriginal people, and where they resisted they were displaced or killed.

That Abbott and many in the media can dismiss those facts and their ramifications, and see the arrival of the British as ‘a good thing’ even for Aboriginals, surely displays their worldview, one predicated on the superiority, righteousness and infallibility of Western (and especially British) civilisation.

If Martians stole the Earth, imposed their law, banned our culture, called us miserable wretches and killed nearly every one of us, would we doubt they were invaders or celebrate the day they arrived? ²

Show 2 footnotes

Australia’s incremental steps to war: Part 2

5 July 20154 March 2015 by Ashley

On 11 October 2014 I wrote an article ‘Australia’s Incremental Steps to War,’ which analysed the Australian government’s gradual escalation to committing troops to fight Daesh in Iraq. I concluded with this:

The government’s expansion of Australia’s involvement in Iraq from humanitarian aid drops to the spectre of sending in soldiers has occurred incrementally. At each stage the government has refused to rule out further involvement… With further incremental advances, and without clear and defined goals, it is inevitable that Australian will become more involved.

Less than five months later Prime Minster Abbott has indeed further involved Australia in Iraq, by confirming the deployment of another 300 troops, to help train the Iraqi forces.

Australia’s incremental steps to war

5 July 201511 October 2014 by Ashley

Regardless if it is technically at war or not, Australia is becoming more and more involved in the fight against Islamic State (IS). Keeping in line with the US, the operations of Australian armed forces are gradually being escalated. It is likely the Australian government had considered an extended military role in Iraq as early as August, and was encouraging the US to increase its military involvement there.¹ But politicians know the unpopularity of sending Australian troops overseas, so the government adopted an incremental approach to escalation, as if breaking the news to the public gently, with each step further involving Australian armed forces in the conflict. Over the course of two months Australian operations evolved from humanitarian aid drops into airstrike missions and the deployment of SAS Commandos as military advisers. How long before the government commits ground troops to the battle?

Show 1 footnote