Follow on Twitter
Subscribe by RSS
In Australia’s headlong rush towards progress and affluence, have we lost something that previously defined us, asks Matt Mitchell.
We are the lucky country. Not because of our natural resources (although this is lucky too) but because of the type of society we have. Or rather did have ― it is changing. The Australia of my 1970s childhood was far from perfect, but it had some very good attributes. One was the belief that everyone was equal. Individuals may have excel in some areas – sport, science and so on – and these achievements were lauded, but this did not make them any better than the rest of us. And to make sure no-one’s head got too big, there was a phenomenon known as the ‘tall poppy syndrome’, whereby prominent citizens had their feet kept on the ground. An Australian trait that, in my opinion, was not entirely without merit.
Another Australian trait was the willingness to always help someone out ― especially strangers. If your car was broken down on the side of the road, someone would always stop to help. Once, my car caught fire. A bloke pulled up, pulled out an extinguisher, extinguished the fire out and drove off before I could even say “thank you”
I haven’t seen many people stop to help others on the side of the road recently. Perhaps its because everyone has mobile phones now? Or maybe we’re all just in too much of a rush?
Anyway, there have been a lot of improvements since the ’70s. We are more tolerant of difference, we cater better to people with disabilities, we maintain the principle that those who are less fortunate should be helped by the more fortunate ― even if our elected representatives use labels such as “work for the dole” that imply all these people are bludgers who would prefer to get money without working.
No-one is perfect I suppose – certainly not our parliamentarians – but what about the rest of us? Are we collectively better than this? Let us judge ourselves by our works.
There are clearly areas of activity in our society that have not progressed since the 1970′s. Some of these are actually dragging us backwards and threaten, not only our our material prosperity, but also a further erosion of our social values.
One such area is economics.
The trouble is that, judging by their works, most economists do not believe in egalitarian ideals ― they believe in elitism. Elitism is the idea that the full benefits of Australian society are deserved only by a few. This implies that economists do not believe in helping the less fortunate ― because, under elitism, these people are seen as less deserving. But it is the absence of elitism that has traditionally been a distinctive part of Australian culture, due perhaps to the absence of an aristocracy or a extensive privileged wealthy class (of course, there were some wealthy pasturalists, but these were few and their wealth has declined along with their pastures).
The Australian of the 1970′s was physically tough – or, at least, aspired to be – but was also fair minded. Australians back then valued manual work, thus the success of the ‘hard yakka’ and ‘hard earned thirst’ advertisements, which resonated with the attitudes of the time.
I wonder what advertisements resonate today?
By comparison, the Australian of 2012 seems somewhat conflicted ― torn between the old values and the new. Torn between a culture of principles and the new one ― of appearances. You know, the one shoved down your throat with every page you download and with every billboard you pass; the world as constructed by marketeers and the suit wearing sharks circling for the contents of your wallet.
I don’t blame Australians for being confused. In this glossy fabricated world, everything is confusing.
We talk about the environment as if it matters ― but then destroy it at almost every opportunity.
We are even weakening our environmental laws ― laws which came about largely because of Australian values in the 1970′s.
We read simultaneously about the benefits gained by privatisation ― and then that these same privatised companies are ripping billions of dollars off us.
We talk about the dangers of global-warming ― whilst preparing our electricity grids to deliver even more carbon generated power.
We talk about humanitarian values, but reject refugees ― whilst simultaneously seeking rapid population growth through mass migration.
No wonder we are confused. I certainly am.
So what sort of people are Australians now?
I really hope they are not people who say they believe in one thing, but then do another.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Australia License
13 Comments
A trip down memory lane, an interesting read at @independentaus The ghost of Australia past http://t.co/7KIn1PAd #auspol
Nice article MATT.
I think one of the biggest changes has been obvious in our banking and finance sector. Our banks have turned into high profit businesses that are often, nothing more than parasites on the rest of the country – the examples are almost too numerous to cite — good businesses destroyed, homes taken, kids thrown out into the street.
It has become socially acceptable to collect a salary for being a paid white collar thug – our law firms, “debt collection agencies” are full of them.
The same parasitic culture is obvious in the growing bureaucracy of local government — in the past 40 years we have seen a huge expansion in the cost of, and bullying power of, our local government.
A lot of the drive and thinking behind these (negative) changes has come (my opinion) from outside Australia — and being something of an optimist, I think we will ultimately reject the parasites — those suit wearing sharks (very well put MATT!) whose theft and bullying makes them think they are an elite.
As societies go, Australia is elite — the vision for a better world and a better future, the willingness to help others, and even the land itself — it is unique, special, and so many of us love it very much.
We still have an Australian future where the “good guys” win and call the shots — though we have a bit of leg work to do to get us back on track.
“So what sort of people are Australians now”
People who have “leaders” who do nothing but talk about policies which are valueless and baseless, who actually believe we are stupid because it appears that we allow them to lead us, therefore we appear compliant to them and their policies
Q So what sort of people are Australians now?
A Gullible.
I was not alive in the 70′s. I am a child of the 80′s, and when I was young I could walk a kilometer to my primary school in an Adelaide suburb without fear. Indeed, the thought that malicious people might want to drag me into their van and murder me was not even on the radar. My Dad worked for a modest wage, my Mum did not, I had two siblings, we lived in a large house, and looking back I see that we were comfortable. Not well off, but comfortable. We could afford nice food, I got to go to Africa to visit my extended family three times in my childhood, and we even travelled across Australia.
What I have seen, in the last few decades years, is a steady increase in violence, both physical and economical. I am now thirty years old, have a child of my own, and another on the way. I work full time for a modest wage, we live in a cramped shoebox, going from paycheck to paycheck with (Thank God) government assistance. My children will not walk to school. I would be an insanely bad parent if I let them, because the idea that they would be beaten by gangs of kids or kidnapped is not a dystopian fantasy, it’s the grim reality that seems to go unchecked by any real preventative measure. Without an unexpected windfall, massive raise or (Unlikely) change of profession, my children will never visit their cousins in Africa. And they will grow up thinking that this is how the world is, prepared by formal education for even worse when they grow up.
It seems to me that the entire idea of civilisation is sharing the load of survival and progress, elevating us above base drudgery, freeing us to be as creative as humans can be. Why is it, in our Lucky Country, in the last thirty years, we have taken such a backwards step? Or is it just me?
WE are a nation of fat, lazy and selfish slugs led by two racist ignorant boat people who punish and persecute the poorest and most desparate of all.
Here is Bowen in 2006.
http://www.chrisbowen.net/media-centre/speeches.do?newsId=2061
Coalition attempts to excise Australian mainland from migration zone
Posted August 10, 2006
Mr BOWEN (Prospect) (10.17 a.m.)?In 1951 the United Nations convention for the protection of refugees came into force. The world realised the mistakes of the 1930s, when many Western nations turned their backs on Jews fleeing persecution in Germany. Collectively, we said, ?Never again.? I am sure that all of us involved in public life would like to think that we would have done the right thing in those circumstances and stood up for those facing the worst of circumstances, regardless of whether it was popular or unpopular. If the Migration Amendment (Designated Unauthorised Arrivals) Bill 2006 passes the parliament today, it will be the day that Australia turned its back on the refugee convention and on refugees escaping circumstances that most of us can only imagine. This is a bad bill with no redeeming features. It is a hypocritical and illogical bill. If it is passed today, it will be a stain on our national character. The people who will be disadvantaged by this bill are in fear of their lives, and we should never turn our back on them. They are people who could make a real contribution to Australia.
This bill represents an extension of the so-called Pacific solution, in which we saw individuals who were processed offshore being treated differently from those processed in Australia. The Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs said in his second reading speech that the offshore processing system had preserved ?Australia?s strong commitment to refugee protection?. He is wrong. Let us take a look at how the Pacific solution has worked in practice. This bill extends the Pacific solution, so it is legitimate to look at how it has worked up until now. Firstly, we have seen families of refugees broken up?callously and in contravention of the refugee convention. Spouses of people who have been recognised as refugees in Australia received correspondence from the Department of Immigration and Multicultural Affairs, which has been reproduced by Michael Gordon in his excellent book Freeing Ali . It states:
Coming from the US as a 6 year old (both parents are Yanks) with my 3 year old sister, I noticed there was a HUGE difference in the cultures of the here and there. Everything, from the way of life to the taste of foods. On the whole, it was a far better existence; one of carefree weekends, warm and sunny weather, much fresher foods (even if I had to wait 15 years to get a beloved Dr. Pepper) and that great Aussie feeling of “She’ll be right”.
Well I can say now at 30, with two kids under 5, a wife and a mortgage, that things have changed drastically in almost all respects – some for the good, some for the not-so-good, and some to the outright detriment of Australian national identity.
I remember very clearly when I first got here having to drive 6 suburbs over just to get some petrol! Now, you can’t drive 10 metres without having something sold or priced in front of you, open at all times. I also remember walking to school (as BSkinner mentioned above, but a lot further than a KILOMETRE ya lucky bugger!) and stopping at the deli for the 1c lollies.
That is where I would differ from BSkinner though as I would have no problem letting my kids walk to school nowadays. It may seem there is a lot more kidnapping and murdering but there isn’t; it is just WAY more reported now than it was then. However, there is definitely more violence FROM kids, so that would be a problem.
I could go on for ages, but I would say the most striking difference between now and the late 80′s/early 90′s is the extreme American-isation of Australian society. I have said it consistently for 20 years now; we just keep going more and more the way of the Yanks, which in my view is far from a good thing and the reason my parents migrated here in the first place. Everything from our new-found need to always be the best in sport (“USA, USA, USA!” anyone remember the Olympics and other world-events?) even if we have absolutely no hope in that sport. We have developed a born-to-win mentality, reflective of our trans-Atlantic cousins, which we seem to display more loudly and more proudly at each coming event.
We now wave flags around on our cars, our boats, our persons and at every available opportunity. We wear them on us like nationalism is something to be proud of (it isn’t!). I cringe at the sight now, ever increasing, of people with the Aussie flag (read: British flag with a few stars on it) flying from a less-than-conspicuous flag pole in their front yard. Do they forget where they are from? Do they need reminding each morning as they leave the house? Do they want to make sure that neighbours know that they are ‘real’ Aussies (read: WHITE Aussies)?
No, it is simply because they saw it on a crappy American TV show and thought it looked ‘cool’ just like everything else that is American. They have that art down to a tee, making something look ‘cool’ while really it is just an exercise in self-aggrandising and, to be truthful, over compensation for perceived weaknesses.
Then again, that could be my inherent anti-American bias seeing everything new in contemporary Australia though star-spangled glasses of mockery and derision.
Still, wouldn’t have changed it for quids; no worries, too bloody right cobber – see ya round like a rissole.
Q “So what sort of people are Australians now?”
A The sort of people who know the price of everything and the value of nothing.
Selfish,self centred, lacking in empathy and wholey involved in a ever decreasing circle of their own opinionated view of the world.
I wonder if this would have happened in the Australia we once knew:
“JUST two weeks ago he was honoured as a surviving hero of the 2002 Bali bombing, which took both his legs and inflicted third-degree burns to 63 per cent of his body.
But in the days leading up to the 10th anniversary Ben Tullipan was told that the federal government would no longer pay for his lifelong medical care.
A distraught Mr Tullipan – who was deemed to have the worst injuries of all those who survived the bombing – was told by a Medicare officer that he had “exceeded” his budget under the Balimed scheme.
The father of two said the bureaucrat told him that, from now on, he would have to pay for new prosthetic legs – costing more than $100,000 – despite the scheme being legislated by former prime minister John Howard to cover the healthcare costs of terrorism victims for life.
Mr Tullipan claims the Balimed officer who delivered the news had also abused him – telling him it was not the government’s responsibility to buy him new legs.”
The quote is from http://www.news.com.au/national/medical-benefit-insult-to-bali-hero-ben-tullipan-over-his-new-legs/story-fncynjr2-1226507871216
DAVEK described us as “gullible” — spot on! – if people were not so gullible, they would realise just how much, and very much contrary to the view of the bullying public servant in the story: IT IS the government’s responsibility to buy him new legs.
If people were not so gullible, they would realise just how much responsibilty our government bears over ignoring the warnings that could have saved Ben Tullipan’s legs.
But that doesn’t bother the chick from Balimed – her attitude is that the victims are nuisances to be abused, bullied and demeaned.
TerraAustralis,
That is a terrible story about Mr Tullipan. It seems some bureaucrats see government handouts as their own money, just like some people seem to regard large organisations as their own property.
Council officers today seem to have extraordinary powers. I know of one lady who kept bees in her yard (quite legal) and the council officer demanded she remove them. Even councillers could not get this decision changed.
In my own area, which has a lot or large semi-rural blocks, council declared that people could not keep livestock without a permit (and permits seem impossible to get). This left one man who had a paddock with a goat in it forced to remove his goat. From a paddock? Can you understand this logic? What was the point and need for this law? It is not like livestock was any sort of a problem in the area. But I bet many others have similar stories.
Hi MATTHEW,
Sadly, I know that stories of bullying bureaucrats are way too common.
I will add another (non Australia one, but not that far away – a real shocker from the Christchurch earthquake.
There were many deaths in the collapsed CTV building in the Christchurch earthquake — but many of those who died were still alive soon after the quake – we know because they got through to friends and relatives as they lay trapped and injured in the rubble. But, many, or most, of them had died before the rescuers reached them.
Read this for a shocking example of bureaucracy gone mad on a power trip – while those people lay dying in agony, the engineer with the rescue gear was forced to waste two hours filling out health and safety compliance forms before he was allowed near the building:
“. . .Christchurch City Council senior manager Jane Parfitt, who was Civil Defence controller . . . .”
(You can read the rest in the article re testimony at the coronial inquest at http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/christchurch-earthquake/7892934/Engineer-got-fed-up-of-waiting-to-help-at-CTV.
TerraAustralis,
Foul. I cannot see how that does not amount to criminal negligence. In any sphere of life apart from politics, people would be held to account. Why is it that our politicians are above reproach? In an (advance Australia) FAIR society, policymakers and governers should be the most scrutinized and accountable individuals of all, as their decisions affect the nation.
Hi BFSKINNER,
Yes, I would see it as at least criminal negligence too, or worse — words don’t do justice to my thoughts about some ego maniac standing over people and stopping a rescue during a disaster while people lay dying with concrete beams crushing broken legs and ribs.
But it is pretty much par for the course for govt in NZ — bureaucrats drunk with their own power and sense of self importance– I think NZ is worse for morons on power trips than Australia, but like GST, a lot of stuff that gets trialled in NZ, later gets “exported” to Australia.
If these clowns and their ridiculous regulations had been running loose in the 19th century, Australia would have never happened – nothing much would have gotten built – and anything that did get started would have been closed down for not having enough permits and forms filled out.
I can almost guarantee that the woman responsible for the enforced delays and paperwork getting top priority during the earthquake will at absolute worst be ordered to do a couple of hours of counselling about the value of human life, and the need for sensitivity to the pain and suffering of others. after she completes that, she will probably get promoted.
Horror stories indeed Terra Australis , but I think that sadly they confirm the premise of this article. The lack of empathy that abounds in our society now is truly frightening.And the lack of common sense is equally so, it matters not one jot how many degrees you have, without any experience and a lack of willingness to accept the advice of wiser heads your arrogant attitude will always cause misery to many.
How sad that with all the education now available we have come to this.