My bad…
Ken Parish rightly criticises me for bringing my “good work undone by including what I regard as an irresponsible and immature incitement to the Indymedia types to demonstrate outside Alexander Downer’s house. He even lists Alexander’s home address.” It was a snarky addition to the post, and totally unwarranted, so I have removed it. It’s a bit much, though, to describe it as “a pointless squandering of political capital and democratic legitimacy.” It was one sentence in a post on a blog, for chrissakes. Let’s not blow things out of proportion.
In general, I think protesting against immigration policies is best done outside the Immigration Department, or outside the Minister’s electorate office. Likewise for other portfolios. In this case, I was under the impression that protestors would attempt to surround Philip Ruddock’s private home in barbed wire, thus symbolically demonstrating to the Minister that what is just work to him is somebody else’s everyday existence. It is a deeply personal issue, and such a protest would have been, in my opinion, entirely appropriate.
In the end, the protestors made no such attempt, opting instead for the march/chants/speeches format of every other rally. This wouldn’t have raised as much media attention if it had been done outside an office block in the CBD, but doing it outside the Minister’s home added nothing to it. It was just another boring, “marching in circles” protest that achieved little (which is why the out-of-proportion, sensationalised media coverage pissed me off so much).
In cases like this, conventions are valuable. As Ken points out, we need to balance the right to protest with the right to a quiet Sunday morning. In most cases, we can do this by protesting somewhere else than a suburban street. I reckon this convention should be maintained unless there is some compelling reason to break it — like an action that relies on pushing at the boundaries of public/private space in order to make its point (like the barbed-wire proposal). Otherwise, don’t bother.
(Incidentally, I once lived in Thornleigh, remarkably close to the dead-man-walking.)
So why if you think some forms of protest outside a private residence are valid did you remove the address ?
I agree with your sentiments that the protestors wasted the oppertunity and squandered what i see as a viable demonstration area, but then backing down letting the ministers live inpeace despite their actions is hardly a healthy response.
Dont cower, push the address and let the public deal with it as they see fit. Why shouldnt we know where our minsiters live.
And why should democratic critercism be shut down by order manners and a few individuals ideas of decency.
But this also brings us to the more interesting question of types and styles of protests. Now the only point of a protest is to get your point communicated. Conservative voters across australia have now stopped bothering to even ask why most current protests are happening when they are all the same form : chants , tired banners and long haired students. Such forms of protests are becoming irrelevent.
What we need is some fresh thinking on forms of protest, ways of getting the publics view heard to those who now tune out.
He backed down because he realised it was childish and maturely admitted to being wrong (I was all ‘bloggers could do it). At least, that’s the way I read it (not putting words in your mouth, am I, Rob?)…
Good to see you posting again
Protesting against immigration policies is best done through the ballot box. If enough people agree with you, your opinion will be carry its due weight. “Otherwise, don’t bother”.
“Otherwise, don’t bother”.
Yeah that will bring us a great democracy. Lets ban the people from even talking about politics for three years then spring an election on them one morning as they leave the house.
Or do prey tell how the people are meant to know which way to vote when your encouraging the silencing of citizens between elections.
Democracy is more than a tri-annual ritual.
You know saddam had such a policy : no public political comment. And elections too, funnily enough he won each with 100% of the vote.
Ave Howard eh ?
Yo Shrink, protest marches aren’t much of a conversation.
Publishing ministers addresses doesn’t go far enough. Everyone should be forced to wear a sign on their back stating their address and the demographic breakdown of their household in case someone wishes to protest against them. That’d keep the bastards honest!
Talk about politics until your face turns blue, Dr Shrink. This can easily be done without creating a public disturbance, as we’re both demonstrating right now.
“protest marches aren’t much of a conversation.”
Ohh really ?, so why were 200′000 people marching in melbourne before the war, or 10′000 in Canberra other than to express a point. To convey a point to their representitives.
Sounds like a mass conversation to me.
Now i havent got howards phone number, and they wont let me into the house of reps when sitting, so my options for conversation with the PM are limited. But via a protest i know my point was heard if not heeded.
Protests are about communicating. When the public feel the offical channels arnt succeeding then they have every right indeed the responsibility to express it in a form that does.
Now i agree theres limits to such protests, and that the banners and tired chants infront of police is becoming a diluted in its effect.
But id rather the occasional minister was harrassed, rather than the oppisate being that the public feel their leaders arnt listening and have no way of communicating to them.
Meanwhile, Howard’s opponents do a marvellous job of winning over more and more reluctant supporters to his side.
I think you have all missed an important point. Afghani refugees were refugees when they sprinted over the border and paused to catch their breath. However, they then travelled through many subsequent countries on the way to the one they wanted to live in, hence they became economic migrants. They are not fleeing the Taliban if they are in Indonesia; they have fled the Taliban. Refugee status is gone. Instead of Australia providing a band-aid solution of sanctuary to the over 3 billion poor and oppressed in the world, we should do something to stop the flow at its source. And to the eternal credit of the Howard government, they have. We helped to sort out Afghanistan, East Timor, Iraq and now the Solomons. Hopefully North Korea is next, then Iran, Sudan, Saudi Arabia and Somalia (do it properly this time). Zimbabwe should be in there (restore the rightful government of Rhodesia) along with musso extremists in Kenya and Nigeria and commies in Mozambique. We can’t pretend these problems don’t exist anymore, nor can we hope they will never affect us - to argue this point is ridiculous in light of 9/11, Kenya and Bali.
Ohh yess, messing up the world via thinking you can fool with the internal machinery and setting up more problems for later years. Thanks.
Tell me how safe is Afghanistan these days ?
This is hardly the place for such an argument though, and im sure we’ve had them all before. But i wonder how you can seriously consider “to argue this point is ridiculous in light of 9/11, Kenya and Bali.” when we are argueing it now.
Fooling yourself into believing you have won the argument is a bad way to go my freind, should you not want holes poked effortlessly through your dead certainties.
Closing yourself off, considering the game up as your want to do, seems a foolish belief to me.
But im sure Rob wont want us heating up this section on what is and oft and old discussion.
Yes, it’s an old debate and I’m not going to be drawn into it again.