The issue of illegal immigration, and the arrival (or attempted arrival) of boat people has confronted us again, surprisingly with little indication of a pending federal election to really take advantage of it. Ofcourse, this hasn't stopped the media from wringing every last drop of emotional fluid from the rag, as they work around the clock to sell their stories using our ignorance, racism, fear, and yes perhaps even our stupidity as fuel.
But alas, I don't wish to blog today about the media's role in all this, or even to put forward an argument as to whether the boat people should be welcomed to our shores or not. There are many blogs and opinions that can cover this, and I would even recommend reading most of them in order to develop a broad and well informed understanding of the situation.
This leads neatly to where I wish today's blog to go. Recently, a discussion regarding the boat people erupted in my office with several people donating their views. Now, the old rule was that the issues of sex, politics and religion were not desirable subjects for debate in the professional workspace as it had the potential to cause friction between workmates. I reject this, not because I'm particularly interested in the details, but because it exposes the real people behind the people you work with. It was quite amazing to hear the opinions put forward, the surprising conclusions and arguments with some being well thought out and balanced while others were simply moronic.
There seems to be a push these days that we are supposed to have unwavering confidence in ourselves. That we should stand firm with our beliefs and never let anyone sway them. Total bullshit! As imperfect people living in an imperfect world to not have doubts about our beliefs and ourselves is ignorance at its most appalling. A great many problems are caused by people who think their opinion is to be valued above all others, and those who cannot even for a moment consider the possibility that alternative points of view hold some sort of worth are to be mistrusted. Without dwelling excessively on the debate about the boat people, surely it is possible that there are valid arguments to welcome them as well as deny them access to Australia. I gained a greater appreciation for the intelligence of my coworkers who were able to argue both sides of the debate and come to the conclusion that there is no definitive answer to the problem.
Perhaps I will never be part of the confident and sophisticated people of the world. But frankly, I think I would rather spend my time with those who are a little unsure of themselves as they at least seem to have their eyes open.
Naff as they now are (and perhaps always were) U2 had a theory that "uncertainty can be a guiding light". So, I really like Zooropa, call it a weakness, but they did capture post-reunification zeitgeist in the guise of pop. Tuning into colleagues and their beliefs is also a creepy way to tune into the zeitgeist which sometimes becomes zeit-dis-gust. Although, after one discussion I had with a community elder during the Tampa crisis, I did vow to never argue with an old lady again.
ReplyDeleteI've noticed some people tend to be absolutely unwavering and unchanging in their opinions... when those opinions have just been heard from someone else, and told to them by someone else. If they've never gone to the trouble to argue themselves into the opinions in the first place, then they'll probably not want to go to the trouble to argue themselves out of those opinions. It also puts them in a handy position. You might want to argue with them, sure - but are you sure you want to argue with everyone who holds those opinions?
ReplyDeleteMitzi.. Arguing with the elderly is indeed a pointless exercise. I expect when/if I reach old age I will have the experience to realize just how little I know. U2 aren't all that naff, it's just that we grow tired of having a millionaire pop star telling us all about the plight of the worlds poor. And it's hard to take a man in purple sunglasses seriously.
ReplyDeleteTim.. True. Seems there are quite a few who happily adopt the most popular viewpoints as their own. Can't say I blame them as it's easier to run with the pack, but sometimes I wish people would just say "I'm not sure, I haven't really got an opinion" if they haven't thought about the issue properly. Arguing with anyone about anything is usually a waste of time.
Wouldn't it be even more refreshing if people would own up to being ignorant:
ReplyDelete"I have an opinion, which I share with anyone who'll listen, but really, I'm an ignorant turd who knows nothing of this, other than the gossip I hear while waiting in the supermarket queue and the headlines that I read on the front page of the Herald Sun".
Recent conversation in my office was about the "declined" fire-fighting water bombing aircraft from Russia - offered during the Victorian fires in February. My colleagues were aghast that the federal gov't had not accepted the offer. Clearly they read into the headlines a crime of some sort, when, truth is, we have no reason to believe that a couple of Russian aircraft would have saved any lives or property. Where would they even have been deployed, under the circumstances? Were they suitable for Victorian terrain?
When I raised these points, my colleagues looked at me as though I was a blithering idiot. Oh no, it's not that complicated they explained to the simpleton. Blah, blah.
Actually it is that complicated. Not all offers of aid in a crisis are accepted. Not all fire fighting equipment is suitable for all geographies. We can never ever assume that, if not for "x", all would have been right with the world.
My colleagues disagreed, vigorously.
It's so easy for the media to capture the minds of an unthinking public.
Back to refugees: it is not illegal for people to seek asylum - in any country, including Australia. It is, however, illegal to arrive in Australia or stay in Australia without a visa.
Even though up to 90% of asylum seekers arriving by boat are ultimately given refuge here, the fact remains, they are selecting themselves, rather than Australia selecting from thousands of other refugees in far more desperate circumstances who are waiting - for years - in refugee camps all over the world.
They also have the means to select themselves. The most recent boat load, which did not make it to shore, and then used a little girl to plead their case in the media, was full of needy folk with iPods and mobile phones.
Yep, I'm being picky, and I don't begrudge anyone owning an iPod or other modern gadgets, none of which signifies whether one is in danger or not.
I also have an issue with people living safely, for years, in other countries, then arriving here in a boat to claim refugee status based on a prior life to the one they've been leading. That's country shopping. Other people - millions of them, don't have that luxury.
Of course, the Refugee Convention was written 60 years ago, and is so reprehensibly out of date that it helps no one, other than those with the means to "queue jump".
It's always amusing (or is it frustrating?) to listen to people throw their support behind grand plans such as the Russian firebombing aircraft. Ofcourse, they are usually not the same people who have to justify the financial outlay. As you say Caz, are they sure it is the right tool for the job? Something makes me think spending the money on equipment and training for the CFS and simple safety infrastructure would probably be more effective.
ReplyDeleteYour points on the refugee debate are very valid. But, the media loves a crying child!
In truth, I wanted to smash that little girl in the face, not so much for the barely existent crocodile tears, but for the perfect English and perfectly coached pleading.
ReplyDeleteAll very unfair of me, not her fault, she's only a child. It's the parents who deserved my wrath, and a beating around the head with my metaphoric 2x4.
Oh Caz, you must have a heart of stone. Or like a lot of Australians you get understandably annoyed when people use emotional blackmail to get their way.
ReplyDeleteI'm not sure who was in charge of the PR of that situation, but I think they failed miserably. Making "demands" and then conducting hunger strikes and tearful plea's by children until they are met is not the way to endear yourself to the Australian public.
I actually have a lot of sympathy for the boat people, and I understand their desire for a better life. Isn't that what we all want? But, there are good arguments too that say countries in crisis (such as Pakistan and Afghanistan) need their people.
There are literally tens of millions of refugees Dan, looking to have a life, without any PR stunts. It's a harsh, cruel, grueling and dispiriting wait, often in vain. Many die waiting in camps with such rudimentary provisions we can't really imagine it.
ReplyDeleteOur recent boat of folk, and their tinny threats to us, to our pollies, our PM? Nope. Doesn't touch my heart in the least. I have more heart-wrenching things in my own day to day life then their little charade.
Besides, endearing or not, the public don't get to vote. But that would make a fab reality show: pitting one load of boat people against another, and Aussies vote for the ones they want to keep.
I have sympathy for refugees, but people arriving on boats don't warrant some extra sympathy from me or anyone else. Besides Dan, the want of a better life is not the criterion for a refugee.
I think the boatloads of starving landless have enough trouble on their hands with Wilson Tuckey maligning them, without any extra condemnation.
ReplyDeleteThe reality tv show idea about boatloads of human in competition is a tad beyond revolting and well far below the lowest realms of taste.
It's important to be critical, ever skeptical and occasionally cynical. It's also important to be Jewish so that when you have to escape pretty much everywhere on whatever boat your overseas relatives can hire for you, you only need to rely on your own kinfolk to get to a safer shore, rather than the Cazmeisters of the world. Now Judaism doesn't encourage conversion, but if those feisty Tamils got a hold of a rabbi, I know one viable democracy where good felafel is served that takes in stranded Jews.
Mitzi - get a grip: it's a blog comment, and the reality TV concept was a joke - goodness knows humans are rather fond of watching no end of truly revolting & demeaning "reality" shows, I don't happen to be one of them.
ReplyDeleteBTW - I'm an atheist, so all of your blathering at the end there is lost on me, empty noise, waste of key strokes.
Mitzi... Not sure if Hindu's would really be up for a conversion on the strength of a gourmet paradise. Then again, a few years ago a friends Mum made us felafel that I thought was so good it could possibly bring world peace. I really should try and find some like it here in Sydney.
ReplyDeleteCaz... Do Australian's watch reality television anymore? Seems to me that admitting to watching reality television is as socially acceptable as admitting to having a venereal disease these days.
Indeey they do Dan - farmers & wives, master chef, geeks & beauties. All rather less harmful that some of the muck of the past, and definitely less harmful than many of the baser O/S concepts.
ReplyDeleteThere's a very late night one of lead singer from Poison (??) looking for a girlfriend. He is well past his prime. The girls all seem as though 'prime' by-passed them entirely. I've seen about 10 minutes of it. Had to scrub with Dettol for several hours.
Ladettes to ladies is about as much fun as watching people throw excrement at poodles, but popular enough for two Aussie versions.
Game shows still have a popularity that confounds me too. Maybe it's the host who confound me - all too often, it's their hair.
Surely the concept has already been attempted, but what about a reality show where we watch people watching a reality show about us who are watching them. Or will this risk an implosion of our universe, which may actually make for a great finale.
ReplyDeleteInterview for game show host-
Interviewer: Hello.
Applicant: Hello.
Interviewer: Do you have attention deficit disorder, surgically whitened teeth, and a $200 a day crack habit?
Applicant: Yes.
Interviewer: Congratulations, you're hired!
I like being told to get a grip. It forces people to try and be even more witty. Like jokes aren't meant to be arguest against or something. Satire is indeed meant to be self-contained and the final word on itself and its target. But if it didn't stir a pot it'd be a bit pointless. One of my favourite sports is tickling atheists, and one of my favourite summer recipes is pickling atheists so that they are still edible through the winter. So good with a dollop of yoghurt or smeared on matza.
ReplyDeleteJokes and satire are not fungible concepts.
ReplyDeleteAtheists are immune to poking. One of the many benefits of not believing in fairytales and invisible friends is that there’s nothing to be stirred or provoked.
Way past being bored by your irrationally irrelevant tedium now.