 Found a word you're not familiar with? Double-click that word to bring up a dictionary reference to it. The dictionary page includes an audio sound file with which to actually hear the word said. |
Further implications
The debate surrounding the inscription marking the statue of Captain Cook in Hyde Park, Sydney, has served to expose a significant divergence of opinion within Australia. This relates to how Australia's history ought to be viewed. It has also revealed significant prejudice in popular attitudes toward Indigenous Australians.
Grant's comment that Captain Cook was self-evidently not the discoverer of Australia drew a great deal of hostility from both professional commentators and readers posting their views in online news publications.
The comments ranged from personal abuse of Grant to abuse of Indigenous Australians. The following are drawn from 662 reader comments posted online in response to a news report by Remy Varga titled 'Stan Grant slams "disgraceful" statue vandals' published in The Australian on August 27, 2017.
Many of those commenting directed personal, sometimes racist, abuse at Grant, generally disputing his right to make the comments he had and implying ingratitude for the life he enjoys within white Australia: These included, 'In the light of all this, I have just read Grant's online biography. He definitely would not be here without white blood'; ' It's like you're on some kind of never-ending book promotion tour, saying anything to get a line in the papers'; ' Lose the tan, Stan. And you might regain some respect'; 'If it wasn't for Captain Cook , Stan would not be here...nor would he have his well-paid job'; 'Australian taxpayers should not have to pay your wages any longer. I demand the ABC sack him'.
There were also many comments denigrating Indigenous culture, history and the abilities and educational attainment of contemporary Indigenous Australians. These included: ' The signs could not have been sprayed by indigenous people, the spelling is too accurate'; 'I'm sure Australians wouldn't mind erecting statues of great Aboriginal historic figures, problem is we don't know who they are because you guys haven't managed to figure out how to write in 40,000 years'; ' Yeah, but at least they worked out that rivers were dug by a goanna spirit. Maybe they could make a statue of that'; 'After 40,000 years of intensive research and development, they invented a hollow log that makes fart noises'.
Without maintaining that these views represent those of a majority of Australians, they do indicate a disturbing undercurrent of racial prejudice and disregard of indigenous views. There is a determined belief on the part of many of these posters that the past should be forgotten. By this, they appear to mean that the dispossession of Indigenous Australians by an act of conquest is no longer relevant in contemporary Australia. 'I don't care if we were ''invaded'' or not and neither should anyone else in 2017.' 'For any to harbour such angst after more than two centuries...is simply...puerile.' 'Time for you and your race to move on Stan.'
Those who suggest that Indigenous dispossession remains significant are characterised as 'freeloaders' exploiting national guilt: 'Stan happily riding the "guilt" gravy train!!...we're sick of the lot of you'; 'Much easier to just claim victimhood. Probably more profitable also'; 'Sad they do find it very difficult to help themselves, perhaps it is because of the "sit down" money they receive'; ' I want "Recognition" gone'.
Comments such as these appear to substantiate Grant's view that Indigenous Australians are not respectfully acknowledged by many in contemporary Australia. These comments suggest that for an Indigenous Australian to assert an Indigenous identity and express a sense of grievance over being substantially ignored in the popular view of the nation's history is to invite ridicule and abuse from many.
Related issues of constitutional recognition, an independent, Indigenous 'voice' in government, and the vexed question of what should be celebrated on Australia Day (and on what date) are likely to reveal the same underlying hostility as the current debate.
Though it may well be difficult and bring latent divisions to the surface, Grant's suggestion that we need to discuss our history from an Indigenous, as well as a colonialist's perspective, appears to be borne out by the negative response his suggestion has received.