The 1965 Freedom Ride...

It is hard to believe that it is 46 years this month that the Freedom Ride of a group of young activists brought the cold, hard reality of racism, segregation, and the poor state of Aboriginal / Indigenous health, housing and education into the living rooms of ordinary Australians who had consciously or sub-consciously turned a blind eye to the challenges facing our indigenous brothers and sisters.

The Freedom Ride is being recreated this year. This Wednesday will see the 2011 activists passing through Collarenebri where the school will receive them and allow them to talk to the students about those times, the present and the future. I am really looking forward to it and I know that the students are looking forward to it to. It is more than just a period off to many of them.

An interesting factoid is that the group that organised the original Freedom Ride came about because of some stinging criticism of a protest that activists at the University of Sydney had held in support of US Civil Rights and the plight of African-Americans in the early 1960s. This criticism was essentially that it is all fine and dandy to be supporting those in the US in their struggle for equality, but how about you all devote some of that zealous exuberance of youth to advocating for those problems afflicting your own backyard.

From this criticism was born Student Action For Aborigines (SAFA). The group was led by Charles Perkins. Another notable face in the crowd was current Chief Justice of the New South Wales Supreme Court, Jim Spigelman. And, the rest, as they say is history. Hopefully, the students will soak up a great deal of this history through the process.

I just remembered, it is also Black History Month in the US...

Mark Twain, "Nigger" and Political Correctness...

I read with interest a story about a recent edition of the Mark Twain classic "Adventures of Huckleberry Finn" being published by NewSouth Books in Alabama. NewSouth has decided after some consultation to replace the word "nigger" with "slave". This means that the 219 times that the word nigger once appeared now see the word slave used instead.

The consultation was nothing more than a suggestion from Dr Alan Gribben of Auburn University who after having taught Huckleberry Finn and Tom Sawyer for many years, and who had always balked at using the word nigger when reading aloud passages from the books decided that the word slave would be more acceptable to young readers and those with an interest in reading Mark Twain's works.

It appears that Dr Gribben believes that the reason Twain's books are not taught anymore is because of concerns over the use of the racial epithet. He believes that the sanitised version is more likely to find its way back onto reading lists.

The removal of the word nigger from the most recent edition is certainly going to give rise to debate on all manner of issues, particularly censorship and political correctness. The decision is one of censorship. Despite the intention, the changing of the words, "injun" was replaced with "indian", by its very nature changes the context of the stories.

The reality was that prevailing attitudes in the 19th century when Twain was writing was one where nigger and injun were acceptable terms. The fact that times have changed and the words are no longer acceptable in a general sense does not equate to a need to remove them from the original text. To the contrary, the fact that they remain provide an excellent "teaching" opportunity to discuss racism and the changing attitudes towards it.

I do wonder how we can encourage children to appreciate literary classics and to appreciate literature in a more general sense if we feel the need to censor it and make it "suitable" for certain readers. I wonder whether we should shy away from controversy or should we embrace it. Why not use the controversy as a teaching moment that can provide a "lights on" moment for people as they finally join all the dots and gain a deeper appreciation of the work, the author, and the intent.

Sadly, this was not the first attempt to be politically correct (Florence Kate Upton and her original creation of the Golliwog and Enid Blyton and Golliwogs) with a piece of classic literature and it is unlikely to be the last.

Ho hum...

A Review of "How to Catch Mr. Bule"

This is a simple "cut & paste" of a post made back in April 2008. I noticed that there has been renewed discussion of the merits of this book. The links have been updated, a picture added, and a postscript discussion.

As promised!

I scurried out this morning with the missus for an appointment with a doctor to confirm what a home pregnancy test had revealed on Friday! I know you are all wishing her well :)

Anyways, back to the book! After the appointment it was off for a wander in Metropolitan Mall and a swing by Gramedia. It did not take long to find the book and there were two great big piles of them. They were not flying off the shelf apparently but perhaps this is not a reflection of the quality of the book but rather that perhaps there are not as many Indonesian women in Bekasi looking to catch Mr. Bule. Long story short bought me a copy and then headed off to Hoka Hoka Bento for lunch.

As a side point, the missus did not believe such a book would ever be written. I said perhaps it might have been a good thing if it was written 12 or so years ago so she could have had the tools at her disposal to choose Mr. Right! Smiles all round...

So, how does the book hold up in comparison to other guide books like Lonely Planet's Indonesia on a Shoestring? Perhaps Lonely Planet is not such a good example now that it has been revealed that at least one of their authors did not even visit one of the countries he wrote a guide book on -- a total fraud! A travel guide might not be a fair comparison you say, but alas it is, and you will have to read the book to see why.

Nah, you won't! The book contains sections on living in foreign lands with Mr. Bule once you have caught him. So, it is a sort of Culture Shock (as advertised on Jakartass) meets Lonely Planet.

The book taps into all of the stereotypes that abound about inter-racial relationships between Indonesian women and bule men. But, it seems to be a genuine attempt at being informative about how to make the best of these relationships with a view to making them long-lasting. The 'empirical' evidence that the book is based on is word of mouth and personal experience. The author is married to a bule, Duncan Graham, and the author and Mr. Bule are currently residing in New Zealand (hence the culture shock meets lonely planet reference).

For all you out there who are offended by the word bule and the racist undertones that it has, will be pleased that the book offers up two other alternatives:

BULE = Beautiful Unlike Lots Elsewhere

or my personal favourite

BULE = Bald Ugly Lazy Easy (money)

For me, I could not help but have a little chuckle to myself when I read the advice that the author offers to Indonesian men who might be reading this little tome, which goes along the lines of if you, Indonesian men, want to get the attention of Indonesian women and stop them from preferring and finding bules then you, Indonesian men, need to treat Indonesian women better. This is a generalization and before you all jump on my head and beat the crap out of me in a figurative sense, these are the words of an Indonesian woman!

The chuckle however related to the idea that perhaps any Indonesian men reading this book were more interested in how they might be able to catch Mr. Bule as well rather than any interest in finding an Indonesian woman.

In the spirit of guide books there are chapters covering all the issues, at least as the author sees them, relating to the inter-racial relationships envisaged. These include chapters on communication, sex, gossip, extended family relationships.

The book is targeted at Indonesian women who are perhaps educated and professional but not so much to Indonesian women who might be looking to "escape" from the kampung. The book, at least for me, presupposes an equality between the prospective couple which you might not find with Indonesian women who have not had access to educational or work opportunities. However, some of the best advice relates to the idea that all bules are great. The author goes to some pains to point out that this is not the case and that bules are like everyone else; some good, some bad - avoid the bad!

Some of the other classic bits of advice relate to cultural issues like: don't be surprised if he (Mr. Bule) is not happy when you hit him up for cash to support your extended family like he is an ATM machine, don't be offended if on arrival home from a hard days work he greets his dog before he greets you (just the bule way apparently), don't worry that bule culture relies on alcohol but alcohol consumption is not always bad because sometimes in bule country it gets so cold that alcohol is drunk to warm up your body, and don't worry if your husband is watching a comedy show on TV and then all of a sudden breaks out in laughter and starts pissing himself laughing until he falls out of his chair and you just do not get the joke you should not feel alienated by this or become homesick, among many others.

Unfortunately, the book is only in Indonesian at the moment, but this is hardly surprising seeing that the target market is Indonesian women. So, if any of you bules out there want to know what it says precisely then you will have to read it yourself, or learn Indonesian, or get someone to read and translate it to you! Or you will just have to believe what I and others write about it!

For me it was in fact worth the 25,000 Rupes that I paid for it! I don't know that I learned anything but I did have fun reading through it! There were plenty of those WTF or are you kidding me moments. Yet, on reflection this was probably more so because of my personal experiences that are so different from those of the author than anything else, as well as the different ways that people view other cultures and their own...

Have a nice day!

Postscript to the original post...
I have discussed the racial connotations of the word bule in previous posts and how some "white" expatriates are offended by the term and others seem to want to co-opt it as a form of empowerment. In essence, there are some similarities between this debate and the debate that surrounds the word "nigger". However, seeing it is a debate happening in Indonesia and is far-removed from American pop culture, it simply is not a debate on the same scale. Although, as I recall from my travels through cyber-space, there have been many a heated discussion on the topic of bule. A good source for discussion, pros and cons, on the bule issue is Indonesia Matters.

However, as the title of the book suggests, the use of "bule" is common amongst Indonesians and most are unawares of the racial connotations. This is evidenced by the fact that Indonesian televisions programming includes shows like "Bule Gila" or "Crazy White People" among myriad of others.

What Colour Skin Do Hobbits Have?

This may seem like an innocuous enough question, but it does have serious ramifications for the filming of J. R. R. Tolkien's The Hobbit by none other than Sir Peter Jackson. Jackson was at the helm of the Lord of the Rings Trilogy and won an Oscar for his efforts. The much anticipated prequel to those films has run into myriad of problems as backers try and get the two-part film made.

The most recent controversy to afflict the film relates to a Pakistani woman being knocked back for a part as a Hobbit extra in the film. According to the casting agent the young woman, Naz Humphreys, was not "light-skinned" enough for the part of a hobbit. Hmmm....

This got me thinking. I have not read The Hobbit since I was a kid. So, it was time for a little research.

There are three types of hobbits: the Harfoots, the Fallohides, and the Stoors. Generally, hobbits are between 2 and 4 feet tall. The Harfoots are the most numerous, the Stoors are the next most numerous group, and the Fallohides are the smallest group. The Stoors are a little shorter than the others, they are also a little broader, and they are particularly fond of water and things associated with water like boating. Presumably, the additional outside time might suggest that perhaps a more tanned and darker complexion is possible. In contrast, Tolkien went to some length to set out that the Fallohides were generally fair-skinned and taller than other hobbits. The Fallohides also had close links to the elves (some inter-breeding perhaps?)

Interestingly, the advertisement that went into the Bay of Plenty newspaper looking for hobbits required men to be no more than 5ft7in and women of no more than 5ft2in in height. The ad also required women to have fairer skin tones. Although, Jackson and his company, Wingnut Films, have steadfastly maintained that there was never any such instructions given to the casting agent.

In any event, common sense in 2010 would dictate that even if you were trying to recruit potential hobbits of the fairer skin variety then you would be very explicit in making your brief one where you were seeking to cast Fallohides and not Harfoots or Stoors. Needless to say, the casting agent was fired. It is unclear as to whether Humphreys ended up scoring a part as an extra in the film.

This post is not actually about discrimination in the 21st century, rather it is to clarify what skin colour is most prevalent among the hobbit groups as described in Tolkien's works where hobbits make an appearance.

Wikipedia has a good overview of Hobbits.

Whiteness Theory & Post-Racialism...

This post is probably worthy of a PhD thesis, and perhaps I will write it one day (a PhD thesis is something that is definitely on my bucket list). I might have to decide whether I write it from an education perspective or a legal / justice perspective (then again, I might just combine both and be much less focused).

I have always been interested in these ideas, but strangely enough had not really named them and related them back to theories in the field. In that regard, I have a recently completed subject on diversity for setting readings that 'forced' me to read in more detail about these ideas. The reason I had been thinking about these ideas previously related to both Australian and Indonesian contexts.

In the Australian context it really related to criminal justice and the over-representation of my indigenous brothers and sisters in the court and jail systems (and whether education had a role to play in redressing this sad imbalance).

In the Indonesian context it was really about whiteness theory co-opted into an idea of Indonesian-ness theory. Simply, the idea of honorary Indonesian-ness or Indonesian-ness being the norm to some degree. This one is a much more complex one than whiteness theory because of the way that Indonesian-ness is constructed in the first place. Indonesian is a melting pot of diversity and this is recognised in the notion of Bhinneka Tunggal Ika or Unity in Diversity (although it might be argued that the concept might be better understood from a literal reading of the Javanese that it comes from as being unity from diversity). To be honest, I had also been thinking about the idea of Indonesia-ness with respect to Barack Obama, the US President, and the reverence ordinary Indonesians have for the man and expectations of him from three or so years of living in Indonesia as a child.

This is intended to be a short post. But, hopefully it might inspire a few comments instead of just the usual page views that my posts get.

So, here is the basic idea. Whiteness Theory really is about "whiteness" being the norm. The kicker is that you do not have to be white, but merely accepted as being white. Hence, whiteness is not about race, it is about cultural values and the perceived power and opportunities that being 'white' brings. Yet, it is arguable whether whiteness is an overt or covert theory. The idea that it is covert rests in the manner in which race is talked about, this is in spite of the idea that whiteness theory is not about race, because more often than not it is race which premises the discussion.

I guess what I have been thinking about is the convergence, or lack thereof, between whiteness theory and this idea of post-racialism. This came more to the fore with the election of Obama to the White House, as people started falling over themselves, like Oprah Winfrey for example, in order to claim that this was the start of something big; a post-racial America. Personally, I would need to do a lot more research, but first impressions are that these people are kidding themselves in a reality sense. I understand conceptually what post-racialism entails but I wonder whether the election of a person of mixed race to the presidency of the US is in fact a sign that post-racial America has arrived.

If whiteness theory is about power and privilege then could it be argued that Obama's rise to the presidency fits within the parameters of whiteness theory where arguments of power and privilege prevail?

I do wonder whether the election of an Indonesian of Chinese or Indian or Arab descent would signify a post-racial Indonesia? But, I think before I can wonder that, I tend to wonder whether Indonesia can reach a place of tolerance of, and for, minorities, and really live up to the idea of unity in diversity.

As you can see, there is real potential for me to add to the abundant literature already out there on this topic. Oh, and no apologies for the disjointedness of this rambling post, it remains an unedited ramble of ideas, thoughts, and concepts that are bouncing round in my head.

Ho hum...one more university assessment task to go.

Racism in Australian Politics...

This is a lesson on how to get yourself disendorsed in a heartbeat as a candidate in a federal election.

David Barker was the Liberal Party's candidate for the seat of Chifley. Chifley is a safe Labor seat at the moment. As a matter of fact, it is so safe that it has not been held by anyone but Labor since it was created in 1969. It has been held by the current member, Roger Price, since 1984. So, it was unlikely to change hands at this election anyways.

Nevertheless, this was no deterrent to Barker who considered himself a pretty good shot at winning the seat. After all, his opposition from the Labor Party in this election is a Muslim, Ed Husic (as an aside I heard on the Channel 7 or 9 news this evening in relation to this story that Husic was a non-practising Muslim, whatever that means), and Barker firmly believed that Australians and especially those in the electorate of Chifley would not vote in a Muslim.

Barker, like any other Australian, is entitled to his opinion. He is entitled to this opinion even if it is wrong, misguided, and perhaps even offensive to some. However, in the context of the election, these are extreme views and posting them publicly in Facebook backed the Liberal Party, who had endorsed him as their man in Chifley, into a corner. The Liberal Party could not, and cannot. afford to be directly associated with such extreme views. Yet, it might be argued that the Liberal Party's hard line approach on policy on asylum seekers and migrants might suggest that they trying to capitalise on the idea that there are elements within the Australian community that feel threatened by migrants and outsiders.

I read during the week that Pauline Hanson might be interested in rejoining the Liberal Party if Tony Abbott, the current Liberal Leader, was to extend her an invitation. My guess is that she should not hold her breath waiting for that invitation. Yet, it is worth remembering that Pauline Hanson was elected to Federal Parliament after tapping into community fears about multiculturalism and migration.

Barker was not satisfied with just going after his Muslim opposition, he saw the need to go after the current Prime Minister for being an atheist. According to Barker, Australians are not ready for Muslims in parliament and Australians have a real problem with their government being led by an atheist. Barker is clearly on a mission from God. It would seem that his God wants him to be the saviour of Australia and reset this fine nation back on the path to Christian righteousness.

For Barker, this is not a question of faith. See, Barker believes that every Australian is entitled to a faith of their choosing but if you choose to be Muslim then you should not be in parliament. Furthermore, if you do not believe in God then you should not be in parliament at all either, and definitely not leading the government.

My personal opinion, and it is anecdotal at best (I have not done the research, even if it is out there), is that Australia is not an inherently racist country. I believe that Barker's views are a minority in the community. I am not naive enough to argue that they do not exist. I would argue, and argue passionately, that Barker's views are minority views. The majority of Australians have embraced multiculturalism and the benefits that this has brought us as a nation. That same majority would also understand that multiculturalism has not always been smooth sailing and that as a nation there are still problems we face.

However, Australia in that regard is no different from any other nation on earth that has a rich history of accepting migrants. Let's face it, the vast majority of Australian citizens can trace their family history to an original migrant if they look hard enough.

The Terminator vs. The Road Warrior (Mad Max)...

This is sure to be a much better offering than the "Predator vs. Alien" film or the other classic two franchise spin-off of "Freddy vs. Jason". This is better because it is like reality TV and involves Arnold Schwarzenegger, current Governor of California (aka 'the Governator') vs. Mel Gibson (aka misogynist, anti-Semite, racist and alleged beater of women).

Arnie was in some good comedic form at a recent gig where he was supposed to be talking to a group of utility commissioners in Sacramento about energy issues and ended up comparing Gibson to the environmental disaster that continues to unfold in the Gulf of Mexico.

The one-liner was premised by it seems BP has worked out how to contain the gushing oil well in the Gulf of Mexico, but "no one has figured out how to contain Mel Gibson."

Now, Gibson has been in the news over the years for his inability to control his outbursts, seemingly this is exacerbated by alcohol and more recently dementia drugs, apparently. The most recent spray was directed at the mother of his youngest child, Oksana Grigorieva.

In keeping up the game, the governor added that participants probably should turn off their mobile phones as they were expecting a call from Gibson.

Ouch, Mr. Governator! That was a cheap shot, don't you think?


Just as a side note. I have wondered whether it is possible to separate the man from his acting? I only ask because, I have enjoyed watching some of his movies. As a man though, I do not have a lot of time for a fundamentalist catholic with a family history of denying the Holocaust, who is anti-Semitic, racist (his latest rants included derogatory references to blacks and hispanics), and a misogynist. So, that's why I wonder whether I can separate the man from his acting and feel comfortable with the fact that I have enjoyed some of his films.

On another side note. It has been theorised and speculated that Gibson has been using Chantix to quit smoking. Chantix is also used in the treatment of Alzheimer's and dementia. The side effects of this drug are nasty to say the least. Not that this is an excuse because some of his behaviour and attitudes predate him taking this drug, but it is a mood changer for sure.

There are some pretty serious allegations against Mel Gibson with respect to domestic violence and abuse of his girlfriend. These allegations do, and should, attract jail time if the offender is found to be guilty.

Ranga -- Derogatory and Offensive?

Barry O'Farrell is the New South Wales Opposition Leader, and he believes he is a shoe-in to be the next Premier of New South Wales.

It is pretty hard to see how the Labor Party can pull this one out of the fire as they are behind in all the polls and it would seem that there is some Labor fatigue in the electorate.

However, where there is a will there is a way and O'Farrell would not be the first NSW Opposition leader to shoot themselves in the foot on the way into a seemingly un-lose-able election!

This is evident in a recent Twitter post the leader of the opposition made, supposedly off the record, to a journalist, Latika Bourke. He referred to Australia's current Prime Minister as a "Ranga". Now ranga is derived from the word orangutan (in Indonesia this is an abbreviation of the words orang hutan, which means simply forest dweller). The word reflects the colour of one's hair, in this case, red. There is little doubting that the PM's hair has been a topic of discussion over the years as it moves between various shades of red.

However, the offense is not so much singling the PM out for the colour of her hair, but rather referring to her as a monkey. It was not all that long ago Australians were up in arms when one of our cricketers, Andrew Symonds, was called a monkey by a visiting Indian player, Harbajan Singh. When will people realise that calling other people monkeys is going to attract attention, most probably negative, despite the intent.

The 'tweet' was regarding the problems that the Liberal Party was having in selecting candidates in key seats leading into the 'soon' to be announced Federal Election. Verbatim the tweet reads like this:

"Deeply off the record - I think the timetable and struggle to get candidates reflects internal poll - pre and post the ranga."

My guess is he could have said the same thing in a different way and made the same point, even though Twitter restricts posters to 140 characters or less. This also reflects how much more difficult it is to have things off the record in the twitter-verse. O'Farrell realised the error of his ways pretty quickly and removed the offending tweet. However, this was not done soon enough and people had already re-tweeted it and as they say, the rest is history.

As an aside, on my most recent practicum placement, I had a red-headed student in one of my classes and he was regularly referred to as a ranga. This did not seem to bother him though, and was seemingly accepted as par for the course. I was only observing the class, but apparently the offensive nature of the word had been discussed. Yet, the young lad referred to himself as a ranga as well. So, it is perhaps an interesting debate as to whether the context and the usage of the word is exclusively offensive or are there times when it can be co-opted and used as a source of empowerment.

American Violet...

I have not done a movie review for a while. There is good reason for this, I have not watched any movies! Doing a Masters is always a lot of work I am told. I am doing it in accelerated mode, so I am doing a 150% load. Anyways, enough with the excuses and back to the review.

I am not sure what made me pull this movie out of the pile of 50 or so that arrived home with my parents after their recent jaunt to Bali. But, I like Will Patton as an actor, and I saw his mug shot on the cover of the DVD and thought, why not? Besides, there was the added attraction of it being supposedly based on real events. And, it was about how the law can be used and abused by those with an agenda. I did a law degree because I wanted to help those less fortunate and those who always become the victims of those in power who seek to use and abuse the power that they have been given.

The film was American Violet.

The film shines the cold, hard spotlight on race relations in the US. It is particularly scathing in terms of the portrayal of power and how that power is used to racially profile and discriminate. It was also interesting to hear that in the US somewhere in the vicinity of 85% of all criminal cases end with a plea deal (personal note: go check this out). It is a scary statistic in that plea deals often force innocent people to plead to crimes they did not commit in order to avoid a much harsher penalty. Yes, I am sure there are figures out there that show that people who have committed serious crimes exploit the plea deal system to garner a lighter sentence than they deserve. But, it is my review!

For me, this was an excellent film. It was powerful and simple in its depiction of racism. It was equally powerful in terms of its message, little people can sometimes beat the odds and win. It is not a movie that everyone will enjoy, but you cannot please everyone all of the time.

The film is based on a raid of a poor black housing project in Arlington Springs (Texas) in 2000. The raid for drugs was based on the grand jury testimony of a single informant. The raid ensnares single mum, Dee (Nicole Beharie). Dee is accused of selling drugs in a school zone which sees her facing somewhere between 15 and 26 years in prison. Ultimately, the District Attorney offers her a plea deal; a ten-year suspended sentence. To get this deal she must plead guilty. A guilty plea has significant repercussions, not only is Dee a felon if she does, but she is also likely to lose any benefits that she receives. Dee chooses to fight.

However, she is not in this fight alone as the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) appears and offers to take her case as a means of highlighting the racist nature of the raid. In essence, the case becomes a significant test case on racial profiling and the use of single informants in grand juries to secure arrest warrants, at least in Texas.

This is a movie with a feel good ending. Although, the end credits include a note that the District Attorney who is responsible for Dee' predicament manages to secure re-election to the position of DA. So, despite the feel good nature of the ending, the reality remains that obviously a vast majority of the voters in the relevant area seemingly agree with the vision of the DA.

I recommend the movie (not that this means anything in the grand scheme of things). It is an enlightening and entertaining 103 minutes.

"Negro", "Black", or "African-American"?

This blog of mine generally focuses on issues relating to Australia and Indonesia. However, the whole point was that the blog was to be a place that I could write about anything that piqued my interest or that I wanted, or felt the need, to pass comment on.

Politically correctness and racism are issues that pique my interest. They do so because I sometimes feel that the drive towards politically correctness is a hindrance to full, frank, and open debate about issues. In this case, the issue is race. Race is an issue that is highly emotionally charged, and is one where there are quite divergent opinions amongst those who are subject to the terms that politically correctness generates for us.

This brings me to the substance of this post. I read an interesting article today over at Slate today. The article was discussing when the word "Negro" became taboo. The taboo came soon after the book Black Power: The Politics of Liberation was published in 1968 (cover of the 1992 version is above).

The purpose of the Slate article seemed to be exploring the drive to political correctness in making the term "Black" taboo in preference to the use of the term African-American. I would encourage those with an interest in this sort of subject matter to read the article.

The parts of the story that I found most interesting related to how organizations deal with the changing dynamics, and the drive, to replace certain words with new words while simultaneously stigmatizing the previous term. Also interesting to me was that the move towards the term "African-American" does not have universal support as a majority of people are seemingly non-plused one way or the other with respect to African-American or Black.

With regards to organizations, the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) has not changed its name but uses the word 'colored' in very limited contexts. The United Negro College Fund tends to go by the initials, UNCF, rather than the full name. Seemingly, this is an exercise in re-branding a familiar and ongoing concern that helps a lot of young people achieve their goals. Indeed, a mind is a terrible thing to waste.

Bringing this back home for me got me to thinking about how we refer to Aboriginal Australians. There was a time where the were referred to as Blacks. There was also a time where the preferred term was Aboriginal, and seemingly of late there has been a move towards the term "Indigenous Australians". I am sure organizations in the Australian context would encounter similar considerations in relation to names. For example, the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission (ATSIC) before it was dissolved.

I do not know about anyone else, but I find this sort of 'stuff' interesting.

Hate Crime in Australia...

The murder of a 21-year-old Indian student, Nitin Garg, in a West Footscray park is a tragedy. The young man studying in Australia was on his way to work at a local Hungry Jacks when he was stabbed and killed. However, the murder is certainly testing the bilateral relationship between Australia and India, particularly so with the publication of the above cartoon.

The cartoon, published in Delhi's Mail Today, depicts an Australian police office in Ku Klux Klan garb. The suggestion being that Australian police are racist and not doing enough to solve the murder of Garg. The further suggestion is that Australia is a overtly racist country that is not only unwelcoming of foreigners but a country with a long history of racism towards the indigenous population (Australian Aborigines).

It is not like Australia is the only country in the world that has issues to deal with on the racism front or the treatment of its indigenous population. It is not all that difficult to find Australians who acknowledge as much. However, the majority of Australians are good people, welcoming, caring, understanding, and humble. There are those, though, that exhibit none of these redeeming features. The reality though is that this is true of all countries. India, for example, is not a place that is free from the scourge of racism or violence. The simple truth being that people who live in glass houses should not throw stones.

The murder of any person I find abhorrent. And, it is no different in this case.

However, to state that the murder of this young man was racially motivated is premature to say the least. It is premature because at this point in time there is not a suspect, at least not that is being publicly discussed. This murder may be a case of being in the wrong place at the wrong time. Yet, let the police do their job, and if it turns out that the crime is racially motivated, then that is something we as a community must address and deal with no matter what colour, religion, gender, or political persuasion we might have and irrespective of whether we be citizens, residents, tourists, or international students.

The cartoon is offensive. However, I personally do not feel that it goes beyond the line in the sand with respect to what constitutes free speech. The cartoonist is entitled to his opinion, which he has seemingly expressed through this cartoon. Nevertheless, offensive or not, the cold hard reality is that police still have a job to do, and that is everything that they can to find the young man's killer(s).

Perhaps rather than cartoons designed to inflame the situation further we should come together as a community and seek ways to address the concerns of racism and violence in our communities in constructive ways that will see us all creating a better community for our children and our children's children.

"Break Out" -- Micheal Mackinnon & Iain Croucher...

This is something that Dilligaf posted on his Facebook Wall and I discovered it there. The video embedded here is available on YouTube.

The video "Break Out" is a Micheal Mackinnon and Iain Croucher production and is apparently produced on a low budget. The video is encouraging the British electorate to reject the British National Party (BNP). It is part of the "Hope Not Hate - Stop the BNP" campaign.

The BNP's leader, Nick Griffin, has won a seat in the European Parliament which should make for some interesting viewing. The BNP is a far-right political party and there is active debate and argument, often quite heated, about whether the BNP is racist (you can follow the links here).

I found the video interesting and disturbing at the same time. The interesting angle was the idea that Arabs and Jews can work together where there is common ground, in this case survival or a common enemy. However, to be successful in thwarting the far-right agenda the base needs to be so much broader than just Arabs and Jews. It is disturbing because Mackinnon and Croucher felt there was a need to make the video in the first place.

Break Out starts off fairly innocuously, but the injection of the neo-Nazi skinheads into the equation does make for some intense viewing.

A President With A Sense of Humour...

There has been much made of whether race is a factor in politics no matter where you live in the world. The election of Barack Obama to the presidency of the United States of America was historic, perhaps for many reasons, but none more so than the fact he is a black man. The USA's first African-American president.

The current health care debate has had some commentators foaming at the mouth about whether or not the race card is being played in the sense that some people are anti-health bill for no other reason than the president is black. Obama has addressed these concerns in two ways, one a little more serious than the other.

The more serious version has Obama talking about the fact that the election showed that lots of folks voted for him irrespective of the colour of his skin, these folks were not only African-Americans, but Caucasians, Hispanics, Asians, and a whole lot of others as well. He acknowledges that maybe some people voted for him because he is black and some others voted for the other fella, John McCain, because Obama is black.

The less serious version popped up on the David Letterman Late Show where Obama said, "First of all, I think it's important to realize that I was actually black before the election."

However, it is worth noting that Obama himself has rejected the racism claims as they relate to health care reform and the passage of a health care bill. It is interesting that race is now re-appearing and raising its ugly head after so much talk and discussion of the USA entering into a post-racial phase. Post-racial being used to indicate a period where issues no longer had to be defined on race as there was a common or shared challenge in facing the future. To many this was the hope that the "Yes, we can!" campaign envisaged.

Health care reform is not about race, but rather it is about selling public policy and selling reforms. Simply, it is not going to ultimately matter what the colour of your skin is if you do not have health insurance.

In any event, the irreverent humor displayed by a sitting president appearing on a late night comedy show says much about the man.

Google and Racism...

Hmmm!

Indian Students In Australia -- Not All Good News...

The idea that Indian students in Australia are always the victims of senseless crimes is one that does not always hold true. This is a case in point.

Two Indian citizens who are in Australia on student visas, Sukhjinder Singh and Amarjit Singh, have been charged with sexually assaulting a 17-year-old girl who was asleep on a train travelling from Melbourne to Sydney. This is a train I have travelled on frequently in my youth when I went to Hurlstone Agricultural High School as a boarder.

The girl awoke to find the two Indians attempting to restrain her. They apparently restrained her long enough to sexually assault her. Sometime during the assault the girl managed to break free and notify train staff of the assault. The train staff radioed ahead to police and police met the train at Goulburn railway station and arrested the two men.

Neither of the accused entered a plea at their hearing and both were remanded in custody until the matter is to be heard again on 16 September 2009. At this hearing both are expected to make applications for bail. It is likely that bail will be granted with strict conditions. I would be guessing those strict conditions would include surrendering travel documents and reporting to police at least several times a week.

The moral of this story, if there is one, is that visitors to this fine land are not always victims of racial taunts and other types of vilification, but are in fact perpetrators of crimes against citizens of this fine land. Simply, those that take advantage of and abuse visitors to Australia, irrespective of what those visitors are doing here must be punished. Similarly, visitors who come to this fine land must understand that they too will be punished in accordance to the law.

Just ask Schapelle Corby what that means.

Obama, The Joker, Hope, and Socialism...

Is this picture racist? Or, is it acceptable under the definition of freedom of speech and freedom of expression provisions? Or, is it acceptable political parody?

The image has been finding itself posted in and around Los Angeles and has caused quite a stir. The racial overtones relate to the fact that it is Obama and the image is supposedly intended to be a take on the black and white minstrel theme in reverse. Or, it could simply be a comment on the current debates surrounding the development of a health care bill.

For those who are fans of Batman, then they will recognize that the picture picks up on the image made famous by Heath Ledger in The Dark Knight.

Interestingly, no one has claimed responsibility or ownership of the image.

Indian Students Studying In NSW -- Numbers Dropping

New South Wales can ill afford to be potentially losing some AUD 300 million in revenue from Indian students who choose to study in NSW's institutes of learning and education. However, this is the prospect facing the current Rees government in view of their total inability to reassure potential students coming from the sub-continent about their safety should they choose to come and study here in NSW.

Sad really.

Australia, as most countries in the world, have elements that are not welcoming of those different from themselves. And, in this regard NSW has its share of this element as well. The recent violent conflicts that have given rise to this potential loss are racial conflicts between Indian students and some Australian youths of Lebanese ancestry.

The local media portrayed the conflicts as seething tensions between Indian students and Lebanese youths. This is always the way, when the Australian multicultural community does things that are considered to promote the Australian way of life or they make a contribution that makes all Australians proud, then they are Australians. However, in contrast when they do something which causes shame or embarrassment, then the media and a great majority of the rest of us resort to referring to them based on their ancestral homes. This is irrespective of whether these youths are 1st, 2nd, 3rd, or 4th generation Australians.

Sad really.

However, it is worth noting that racism in Australia is not only Anglo-Australians against the rest. Racism is not limited to one group or another. If it exists, then it is fair to say that it exists across the board. Growing up I always remember visiting my grandmother in Punchbowl, and even as a kid I could notice the changing demographic as one group moved out as another moved in, and this cycle repeated itself. My Nan, I think, she just like living their, and besides she had always lived there, so there it was.

Back to the main point. The bad publicity like the Harris Park stand-off and the subsequent overload of bad press in India has meant that Indians have developed the idea that Australia, and NSW in particular are racist places. This is not true. However, once a perception takes hold it is always difficult to undo. This growing negative view has resulted in new student enquiries about studying in NSW dropping some 50% in next to no time at all.

Generally, there are anywhere up to 20,000 Indian students studying in NSW alone at any one time. On average international students contribute about AUD 29,000 to the Australian economy. The basic math here would suggest that Indian students alone are making quite a significant contribution to the NSW economy.

The response of sending the Minister of Education out to reassure potential students that it is OK is probably a little on the short side. Maybe NSW needs to invest a little to protect the market and be a lot more pro-active in promoting the fact that these incidents, like the Harris Park one, are isolated. The NSW Government needs to recruit prominent members of the Indian community to be part of the campaign to highlight that NSW is not a racist place and in fact it is a welcoming place, and a great place to study and gain an excellent education.

Keyser Trad, A Racist?

This particular post might be of more interest to my Australian readership and those that have an interest in race relations and defamation in Australia.

Keysar Trad, founder of the Islamic Friendship Association of Australia and spokesperson for Sheik Taj El-Din Hilaly, had sued Harbour Radio, the owners of 2GB, for the comments of Jason Morrison on air. In essence, Morrison said that Trad was gutless, trouble, disgraceful, and dangerous, and also an individual who incites violence, hatred, and racism. These comments were made in 2007 just after the Cronulla riots.

Just on the Sheik, this is the same Sheik that said the following in response to a rape:

"If you take out uncovered meat and place it outside on the street, or in the garden or in the park, or in the backyard without a cover, and the cats come and eat it ... whose fault is it, the cats' or the uncovered meat? The uncovered meat is the problem. If she was in her room, in her home, in her hijab, no problem would have occurred."

Trad went onto sue and won a jury trial. However, Harbour Radio appealed on the grounds that what was said, although defamatory, was true. In the appeal at the NSW Supreme Court, Chief Judge Peter McClellan agreed with Harbour Radio. McClellan J was unequivocal in stating that the comments made by Trad were "offensive", "racist", and "condoned violence".

In dismissing the claim and ordering that Trad pay Harbour Radio's costs, McClellan J said, "There is little doubt that many of the plaintiff's remarks are offensive to Jewish persons and homosexuals". He then went on to say, "I'm satisfied the plaintiff does hold views which can properly be described as racist."

It is of little surprise that Trad plans to appeal. It will be interesting to see where the Supreme Court has erred in its application of the law in order for the appeal to go forward.

Will There Be A Runoff?

This is probably not the biggest question of the day but nevertheless it is an interesting question for Indonesian politics with charges being leveled at the various surveying agencies involved. The question is whether the incumbent president, Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono or SBY, will win the presidency in one round or two.

The Indonesian Survey Institute (Lembaga Survei Indonesia / LSI) issued survey results last week that suggest that SBY will win in one round as he polled somewhere around 70% support of those who were surveyed. These results were questioned as the survey was commissioned by Fox Indonesia. Fox Indonesia has links to the SBY campaign.

However, it is worth noting that the LSI conducted the survey and not Fox Indonesia. If the claim is that the LSI produced the results that Fox Indonesia wanted, then this brings into question the credibility of LSI. However those claiming that the results lack credibility have offered nothing more than the fact that Fox commissioned the survey.

In contrast to the LSI survey, the Information Research Institute (Lembaga Riset Informasi / LRI) conducted a survey of its own and achieved some very different results. It is clear that the LRI has links to the Kalla - Wiranto campaign through Kalla. The LRI went to some length stating that the survey was not commissioned by the Kalla - Wiranto campaign.

However, these links should not automatically disqualify the survey results obtained. What is interesting is that the Director of LRI, Johan Silalahi, has stated that if SBY wins in one round he would be willing to dissolve the LRI. He then issues a similar challenge to LSI on their credibility if the LSI results are not borne out in the presidential election.

The LRI survey still has SBY in front of the crowd but the difference suggests a two-round election process. The LRI survey results suggest that SBY has about 33% of the vote, Kalla trails on 29%, and Megawati is a somewhat distant third on 20%.

The argument for the difference in these results is that the has been a recent, and obviously rapid, movement of support to Kalla. This is being attributed to Muslims who are uncomfortable with SBY, particularly relating to the wearing of the jilbab and racism. Zulkieflimansyah of PKS (Prosperous Justice Party / Partai Keadilan Sejahtera), one of parties supporting SBY, has suggested that the members and followers of that party might support Kalla as his wife wears the jilbab.

The racism charges stem from the following comment by Ruhut Sitompul, who just happens to be a member of Partai Demokrat (Democratic Party / PD) Central Board (which happens to be SBY's party), "Arabs have never done anything for Indonesia." Reminds me of the film Forrest Gump, stupid is as stupid does. So, Ruhut, don't hold back; tell us what you think of Indonesians of Chinese, Indian, or Dutch descent.

So, who is right with these surveys? I suppose we will find out on 8 July 2009 when the presidential election is to be held. In the big scheme of things, and surveys aside, it would be interesting to hear and read what the actual policies of each of the candidate pairings are as this might be a little more relevant to the future of Indonesia.

Indonesian politics, lovin' it!

Cartoons and Racism

The New York Post has published a cartoon that compares the first black President of the United States to a crazy chimpanzee that was gunned down by police after it had attacked a woman and allegedly tearing off most of her face. The caption to the cartoon reads "They'll have to find someone else to write the next stimulus bill." Now, it is widely known that President Obama was instrumental in getting the version of the stimulus bill that was eventually passed into the form that was passed.

It would seem that the caption is a clear pot shot at the president. I do not really care all that much for US politics, but I am a follower of events. After all, the US is supposed to be the leader of the free world, right? So, it probably pays to be informed.

It does not really matter what your personal views are on the stimulus bill and the policies being adopted in order to give effect to the provisions of the bill. Like it or hate it, the bill that is, is not what this cartoon seems to be about. To the contrary, there is a clear reference to the President and the reference is also that he is a maniacal chimp.

I really cannot work out how the New York Post cannot see the racial over or undertones to the visual provided. It is pretty clear and has been for some time that comparing black people to monkeys is not on and when it is done it should be labeled for what it is, racist.

I am not a big fan of political correctness, the idea of calling a person who suffers from cerebral palsy, physically challenged or a dwarf a little person or for that matter a black American an African-American seems to protecting sensibilities that do not need that level of protection. Nevertheless, that said, I am rarely in a group that is so labeled. Although, for those of you readers who know Indonesia and the term "bule" you might understand how it is to be labeled for the colour of your skin.

My old man is a Welsh man and I cannot recall ever calling myself Welsh-Australian. That is not to suggest that I am trying to hide my Welsh heritage or that I am not proud of it. I was born and raised in Australia and that is how I identify myself. But I digress.

The New York Post's editor-in-chief, Col Allan, sort to justify the cartoon in this way, "The cartoon is a clear parody of a current news event, to wit the shooting of a violent chimpanzee in Connecticut. It broadly mocks Washington's efforts to revive the economy." However, judging by the several thousand comments uploaded to the story as it was noted in the Huffington Post would tend to suggest that most people are finding themselves offended at the connotation.

My guess is that the New York Post is courting controversy and it seems to have found a good formula to do that, incorporating race into anything, but particularly politics, and to run the gauntlet of comparing the first black president of the US to a monkey must be called for what it is.

Thus endeth another RAB sermon.