It doesn’t take much for a right-wing News Ltd columnist to get stuck into indigenous Australians, does it?
While the first part of Andrew Bolt’s column today makes some good arguments on the subject of the draft proposal by the Director of National Parks to ban the climbing of Uluru, Andrew can’t help devoting the second half to having a swipe at indigenous people in the region – whether they’ve had anything to do with the proposed ban or not:
But I do think it odd that people so sensitive to the pain of Contiki tourists should meanwhile do so little about the pain of their own children.
After all, Mutitjulu is notorious for its drug abuse, juvenile prostitution, boozing, child rape and violence.
So dysfunctional is it that a 2005 inquiry into three petrol-sniffing deaths there was told 10 per cent of the inhabitants were themselves sniffers. The distressed coroner even called off a hearing in the town when a man in the crowd kept a can of petrol clamped to his face.
Then he expresses evidence of their poverty as evidence of, well, their poor character:
Never mind tourists peeing on Ayers Rock – a 2004 government survey found a quarter of the Anangu homes had no flushing toilet, or none that worked, and each held, on average, not only 10 people, but six dogs.
(That would seem to me to be a reason to call for better housing facilities in the region that are above third-world standards, but that doesn’t appear to have occurred to Bolt.)
All of which seques neatly into a rant about indigenous welfare that he knows his readers will just lap up:
No surprise, of course. Three generations had learned by then they just needed to hold out a hand to get all they needed. In 2004, every adult got, on average, $16,000 in welfare, $5000 in free services and more than $3000, untaxed, from the park royalties. Earned income, mostly from government jobs in the park, was just $8000 a head.
Those lucky, lucky, impoverished buggers with the lowest life-expectancy of any Australian. Okay, Andrew’s cynical representation of ALL THAT FREE CASH is not on the level of David Penberthy’s “Illegals live in five-star style” shocker from a couple of years ago, but it’s in that vein. It’s awful, cynical jealousy politics designed to inspire anger in those who’ve been trained to view – in spite of all the evidence to the contrary – aboriginality as some sort of privileged gravy train.
Ugh.
Now I don’t particularly disagree with opposition to a ban – I think Uluru is a national, natural icon, it belongs to all of us, and I don’t think any group has the right to tell others they can’t climb it – but the cynical use of the debate in order to stick the boot into what is still the most marginalised and disadvantaged community in this country is sickening.
And it’s stupid, because while it might inspire website hits, it undermines the actual debate on the subject in question. There are better arguments against an Uluru climbing ban that don’t require damning the local people. It’s a pity Andrew Bolt couldn’t resist the temptation to play that game.
9 Comments
“No surprise, of course. Three generations had learned by then they just needed to hold out a hand to get all they needed. In 2004, every adult got, on average, $16,000 in welfare, $5000 in free services and more than $3000, untaxed, from the park royalties. Earned income, mostly from government jobs in the park, was just $8000 a head.”
Yet they still die at a disproportionate rate. Why can’t the rightards recognise this blatant fact?
You poor, poor leftists, screwed by Kevin “Paris Hilton” Rudd again. When will you learn?
“Asked specifically if he meant climbing Uluru, Mr Rudd responded: “[tourists should be able to] Yeah, to climb it.”"
Losers
Yes Joel, we’ve all heard your rudd-clinton-hilton reference quite a few times now and it doesn’t get any funnier, no matter how many times you throw it around.
Obviously though you think it is the height of witticism.
“You poor, poor leftists, screwed by Kevin “Paris Hilton” Rudd again. When will you learn?”
I’m a leftist, I dislike Rudd because he isn’t (that’s not the only reason, he’s also a wowser and a populist), not that you’d understand, you’re probably one of those rightard fools that thinks Rudd and Obama are socialists. What was your point again?
Spot on Jeremy, I guess its unfortuneate but no real surprise that Bolt would not be able to resist whacking a few into one of his favourite hobby-horses though, mind you I’m amazed he didn’t somehow work a reference to the stolen generations in there as well. I haven’t read any of the comments on his thread, but no doubt some of his regular posters will fill in the gap for him.
Staggering non-sequiturs abound in this one from Bolty, even from the master of the non-sequitur. e.g. You want us to stop pissing on the rock, but you guys don’t even have working toilets in your houses. What. The. F*ck? It’s basically a nicely-worded version of “and we’re gonna keep on pissing on your precious rock until you losers can pull yourselves out of abject poverty. Got that?!”
“It belongs to all of us” Hmm.. Terra nullius?
““It belongs to all of us” Hmm.. Terra nullius?”
Peoples and lands have been conquered since the beginning of time. It is pointless trying to right all of the historical wrongs. Where do we go back to? 500 years? 1000 years?? Have a mass global migration whereby everyone goes back to their ethnic homelands, which may or may not exist as they too were conquered a couple of hundred years before??
History is history…theres nothing we can do about it. Australia is now a democratic nation where anyone can run for office and if they get enough support, make any laws they want, then be judged at the polls. If it is trully a sacred site then why have anyone visit it?? Might lose the tourist dollars through…
It is pointless trying to right all of the historical wrongs? It is not history. It is still happening, this case in point.