Sorry and the stolen generation

As a quasi-Australian (ie I lived there most of my life) and someone who has spent quite a bit of time in aboriginal Australian communities and parts of the country that have a mostly indigenous population, I have always found the stories about how aboriginal children were taken from their families and ‘fostered’ out to white families as a horrible state of affairs and one of the reasons why the breakdown of aboriginal culture has been so devastating to that section of the population. I feel a number of emotions when I think about it. I am ashamed that my ‘cultural heritage’ acted in such a way; I feel pity for those affected. But what I don’t feel is sorrow. I feel no need to say sorry. This isn’t dodging some ethical or moral obligation. The fact is I didn’t do it and neither did the current Australian government.

(I know this is going to wind people up but hear me out)

Sorry doesn’t undo the damage. If I perform some horrible wrong on someone and I later regret it then sure I am going to want to apologise but I will do that through a deeply personal motivation to try and put things right or to begin some process of reconciliation. And I can understand how some people see an apology from the government of the day as a first step in a similar process. The problem I have with this is that governments often ‘speak’ through a need for political expediency not some desire to to the right thing by all people.

Why is is so important for the government to offer this apology? What does it achieve and is it heart felt? Make films, write books, write music, paint pictures and make sure the world never forgets about a tragic part of our history. Don’t lobby the government to do it on your behalf.

Yes the government of the time made this policy and it was wrong in so many ways. The current government didn’t and as our elected officials they speak on our behalf. I’m quite capable of doing that myself, thanks.

I was never a major fan of John Howard, but by offering a statement that basically condemned the actions of the government of the time but not going so far as saying sorry was right and proper in my opinion. If we are going to hold our past responsible for the future we are in dire straights. Learn from the past, make sure as many people as possible know what happened and try to make sure it doesn’t happen again. Society does that, not government.

A ceasefire in name only

As I’ve said before, I’m not going to take sides in the conflict between Israel and Lebanon but I thought it was fascinating that Israel were allowed to conduct a raid into southern Lebanon to stop the supply of weapons to Hezbollah by the Syrians without much more than a peep from the “International Community” << whatever that means.

The reason I find it fascinating? If Hezbolah had acted to stop the Israelies from receiving thousands of US supplied bunker busting bombs, would the reaction be a little different? Or am I just being cynical.

Have you got time for a ceasefire?

Its now 12 hours after the ceasefire was supposedly declared in the conflict between Lebanon and Israel. I haven’t dared switch on the news as I don’t hold a lot of hope for it being lasting or permanent. I should say that I don’t want to take a side on this issue, mostly because I find the actions of the parties involved abhorrent.

Taking what I presume will be the likely outcome out of the equation, I was mortified by the fact that negotiations over the proposed peace had to take place in an environment where innocent people continued to be killed on both sides. No one has been able to give me any reason why our supposed world leaders, you know the ones who go on about charting a course for peace in the middle east, could not have the stomach to call for an immediate cessation of violence on the Lebanon/Israel border. By world leaders, of course, I refer to the Blair-Bush alliance and its new brand of new world order. Apparently it is the United Nations’ responsibility to exert this pressure; the same United Nations that can be run though with little concern when it refuses to back an individual government’s political aspirations (can anyone say Iraq!!!).

I just wish that I could get 5 minutes with either of them. Oh but I can can’t I. In the polling booth.

The insane part of all of this to-ing and fro-ing about the ceasefire is that on the day before it was agreed to come into effect, bombing raids and ground incursions by the Israelis and rocket attacks by Hezbollah were increased beyond anything seen in the last 5 week.

The conversation, I imagine goes something like this:

“How about a ceasefire at 5am GMT on Saturday”.

“Well I’d love to but I’ve got a few more of your civilians to kill first. I tell you what if I redouble my efforts I can probably fit in about three days killing into one day and then we can stop on Sunday. How’s that?”

“Yup, that sounds good to me, but I better get cracking as I’ve got a few of your people to mow down as well”.

“OK great. See you Sunday”

“Not if I see you first”.

This is just farcical. So this stepping up of military action in the last 24 hours before the deadline; these are the actions of two sides intent on peace aren’t they? I think not.