One Cuckoo Short of a Nest Quick Links

News PoliticsReviews IT On A Friday Cabinet Unpacked
Showing posts with label History. Show all posts
Showing posts with label History. Show all posts

Monday, July 11, 2011

Opinion: When Australian Politics Breaks

Digg this

Gough WhitlamToday is former Australian Prime Minister Gough Whitlam’s 95th birthday. Whitlam became Prime Minister in December 1972 and was eventually toppled, not by the Liberal/National opposition, but by then-Governor-General of Australia Sir John Kerr who sacked him on Remembrance Day 1972.

Whitlam’s short term in office was one of the most unstable moments in Australian political history, and was the first true test to the Australian hybrid system of government.

The “constitutional crisis” which surrounded Whitlam’s dismissal was a clash between the unwritten conventions of the Westminster system and the written constitution of Australia, which is required to make the Australian Federation work.

Sir John Kerr broke many conventions when dismissing Whitlam, especially the convention that the Governor-General should consult with the Prime Minister on important matters. I argue that Kerr also broke the law of the Constitution of Australia by consulting with a member of the High Court – a move which is questionable under the separation of powers described in section one of the constitution.

This was not the first time that convention had been broken for the Labor MP; in fact, right from the moment that Whitlam entered Parliament he was subject to breaches of convention. When delivering his maiden speech to the parliament in 1953 after the Werriwa by-election, Whitlam was interrupted by John “Black Jack” McEwen. Maiden speeches are, by convention, heard in silence.

The political instability of the early- to mid-1970s was, to say the least, a scary realisation that Australia’s democracy is far from perfect. But what is the alternative? One of the strange side-effects of anti-communism in Australia is that any non-democratic system of government is hardly considered by the population.

Although any future Governors-General are unlikely to dismiss a Prime Minister, we’re not out of the woods yet in proving the worth of Australian democracy.

I was watching a sitting of the House of Representatives last week, where the house became rowdy so quickly that Speaker Harry JenkinsHarry Jenkins was forced to stand and issue a general warning after only five minutes of sitting time. The rest of the sitting saw Jenkins throw out five opposition members, nearly throw out the opposition leader and yell for silence at both sides of the chamber.

Once again, we are lucky that there is not a strong alternative to democracy in Australia as, given how much of a rabble our Parliament has started to become, it would be difficult to defend the functionality of our system at present.

Although there is some fun about Australia’s parliament and how parliamentarians interact, when there are clear breaches of standing orders for the sake of TV news bites and attempts to stall parliamentary proceedings to force an extra sitting week it has gone too far. Everyone should be thankful that we have no rival ideology.

---

©2011 William Kulich.

“Like” One Cuckoo Short of a Nest on Facebook!

Saturday, May 21, 2011

On A Rapture: Apples fall, not stars!

Digg this
It has been three months since my last post on OCSN. There are a few good reasons for this; I have started a course at University, I have started a local paper (look out Rupert!), and I will even admit that at times I have not posted because of laziness. But one thing that has not been taking up my time is preparing for the Rapture.
Ladies and gentlemen, according to Harold Camping it’s Rapture time!Rapture day. Put on your helmets, wrap yourself in bubble wrap and cover your kids’ eyes for Jesus is a’comin’ back, and he has a grudge 1,975 years in the making!
What is the Rapture exactly? The Rapture is a Christian event; It is a bit like Christmas. Pretty much, the Rapture is the day when all the Christians are supposed to be taken to meet Jesus in the sky whilst all non-believers suffer for not having faith.
But there is only one thing that I really need to know about the Rapture - what time is it supposed to be? I want to know exactly when I will finally get confirmation of my radical Christian beliefs by being spared whilst all my atheist, Muslim, Hindu and Buddhist friends are sent to an eternity of torture and pain.* Oh wait…
I should probably show my hand now. Before I took a step back from the teachings of government primary school religious education (hoorah for a secular Australia!) I strongly believed in a Christian God. But I have since stopped accepting what has been preached to me and for the past eight years I’ve been atheist.
I am sceptical about anything religious, mainly because I like to ask questions and the answers that any religion provides seem so ambiguous and/or farcical. Here is one example: The new testament is essentially a re-written, dumbed-down version of the Bible written when Jesus “came back to Earth” and decided that the Old Testament was too hard for “God’s people” to abide by. If we are supposed to have been created in God’s image, why did we not get it right the first time?
But back to Rapture, or more specifically, the twelfth “notable” predicted Rapture (as stated by John “Jo” Smith of Wikipedia) and Camping’s second Rapture prediction. On that note, I think it’s time for a tally of Rapture predictions:
Predicted by: Notable dates: Secondary dates:
William Miller: March 1843- March1844 (seems that in the old days Rapture prediction wasn’t a precise… science?) Revised to October 1844.
(Full marks for trying!)
Jehovah’s Witnesses: 1914, 1918, 1925, 1942. (I don’t think that I’ve missed any...) (I think they pretty much covered it in direct predictions.)
Chuck Smith: 1981. (Although Metallica’s formation in 1981 might have been some kind of a musical Rapture.)
Edgar Whisenant: 1988, 1989. 1992, 1995 and the list goes on.
Mission for the Coming Days: 1992.
MANY people: 1993.
John Hinkle: 1994.
Harold Camping: 1994 (counted with Hinkle), 2011.
Sir Isaac Newton: Any time from 2060 onwards. 2061, 2062, 2063, 2064
So, the past 12 notable Rapture predictions, including Camping’s 2011 prediction, have flopped like a rebellion in Jerusalem. What of the next one? Could Isaac be right?
Well, just for the hell of it, I am going to make the prediction that Isaac’s prediction is right! Why? Well, by using the same method of loose connections used in formulating previous Rapture predictions, I conclude that because there were 13 people at the last supper, the 13th notable prediction MUST be the right one! Onya Isaac!Visual aid to Kulich’s proof of Newton’s rapture prediction, based off the fine research work of Wikipedia.I do not actually believe this; I know that my theory will eventually abide by one of Newton’s other (already proven) theories, the law of gravitation, and come crashing down…
*KEEP READING!
Get more On A Friday junk sent straight to your inbox; subscribe to the OCSN mailing list today (click here)! It’s free!
OCSN

Friday, October 15, 2010

Review: A critical eye on Tom Keneally’s ‘Our Republic’

Digg this

This essay examines the chapter ‘The Golden Lands of Australia’ from Tom Keneally’s book Our Republic. The review critically explores the factors that may have influenced Keneally’s presentation of information in the text, with a particular focus on his Irish heritage.

A properly formatted printable version of the essay with a full bibliography can be downloaded by clicking here.

---

In the chapter ‘The Golden Lands of Australia’ from his text Our Republic, former Chair of the Australian Republic Movement and author Thomas Keneally presents a moderately convincing case that there has always been a strong current of republicanism in Australia. Keneally explores the background of significant developments in Australian republican history in great detail; however his own republican beliefs are prevalent. The chapter only shows the republican side of the debate, which is further restricted to a focus on Irish political rebels from early in the chapter. Keneally briefly shows how political satisfaction produced a decline in republicanism after federation.

Throughout the chapter, Keneally uses examples of the intuition and motivation of Australian republicans to uphold his stance that there was always a strong republican minority in Australia. These people, who held what Keneally describes as “the other Australian sentiment”, are depicted in this chapter as a prevalent political force in 1800s Australia. He depicts the Irish in particular as respectable, “gentlemen and peasant” rebels with a dream of establishing their own republic. Keneally argues that, although their passions were for another country, their republican sentiment was implanted in the Australian psyche from the start of colonisation. Keneally compares the Irish rebels in Australia to the revolutionary forces of the American and French civil wars. Keneally also shows the influence of the fundamentally British class system on the republican debate. He does this through showing William Charles Wentworth’s move away from his own form of republican-based independence, dubbed ‘Bunyip aristocracy’, as it emphasised Australia’s convict origins. Wentworth was the illegitimate son of a convict,[1] a part of his past that he was keen to forget and which is shown by Keneally as the motivation for his changed stance. This is a simplification of Wentworth’s change, as factors such as land ownership and political success also played a part.[2] Keneally’s incorporation of the class system in his argument is backed by historian Professor Geoffrey Bolton, who adds that republicanism gained a working-class foothold amongst unionists, disillusioned by the collapse of wool prices.[3] Keneally further supports this class argument through the thoughts of republicans John Dunmore Lang and Daniel Deniehy, which he suggests were “influenced not by dreams of Imperial pomp”. He also comments on Lang presenting lectures opposing the “British caste system”. The republican sentiments outlined also include potential transportation of more criminals to Australia, the dependency of the Australian colonies on a “far-off country,” Lang’s claim that the only way Australia will be forced into war “for a century to come, lies in our connection with Great Britain”, the “new Australian identity”, which arose in the 1850s[4], the need for an “Australian court” to replace the British Privy Council, and a fundamental desire for freedom.

Keneally shows the post-federation decline in republican sentiment to be the result of a ‘primitive voice’ and a ‘satisfied… nationalist feeling’. Keneally describes a change in ‘virtually all Australian thinking’ after federation, where ‘even the most radical thinking, favoured the Monarchy.’ Keneally however fails to highlight the concerns of supporters of republicanism in the 1880s, when the debate became more prevalent in Australian society. Professor Bolton argues that market instability, poor wool prices, and the demands of the Australian Workers Union,[5] drove support for unification of the colonies – a key goal of both the federation and republican drives of the late 1800s. The federation of the colonies ultimately provided this political security, equality and a central court. Keneally does mention that labour leader George Black said he had been ‘side tracked temporarily’ by republicanism, after its cause did not provide for greater socialism in Australia, which is only a fragment of Black’s argument. Keneally discusses the idea that ‘loyalism was dogma’ in the new federation, with republicans being punished for expressing their views in the new parliament, including several members of federal and state parliaments who were expelled for criticising the Empire. Keneally claims that republicanism has been ‘corrupted’ from history, citing the posthumous editing of the writings of Deniehy ‘to do away with Republican references.’

Keneally’s Irish background[6] is clear throughout his text. His views on a republic are made exceedingly clear through his position as Chair of the Australian Republic Movement. Keneally presents a considerably narrow argument, with much of the evidence and quotes in the chapter coming from the Irish republican side of the debate. There is no discussion of significant loyalists or loyalist actions in the chapter, beyond the description of a meeting overrun by republicans. In the opening paragraphs of the chapter, Keneally speaks of “gentlemen and peasant Irish rebels” as a predominant force in Australian republicanism. Although many Irish were involved in the republican movement, their numbers may have been exaggerated by Keneally and other Irish historians.[7] Professor Geoffrey Bolton directly opposes Keneally, claiming that the Irish influence has been exaggerated by him and suggesting that the Irish were actually seeking to be “included” by the 1880s.[8] Bolton instead suggests that the gold rushes may have given strength to the republican movement. Keneally comments little on post-federation Irish sentiments. In the section of the chapter on post-federation sentiment, Keneally only touches briefly on Irish Republicanism; a changed angle from his arguments regarding pre-federation republicanism. Keneally’s Irish-centric history may find its roots in his education. In an interview Keneally spoke of his education at an Irish Catholic school, where he recalls being given “a particularly Irish version of Australian history”.[9] When interviewed, Keneally has described early Australian convicts as “my Irish prisoners”. Keneally writes extensively about, and with particular affection for, Irishman John Dunmore Lang, occasionally dropping to a more informal tone when speaking of him and expressing his personal opinion of him. Keneally states that he felt “a lot of fraternity with John Dunmore Lang”. Keneally’s view of Lang is clearly biased. Where he shows Lang to have created the government model used since federation, other authors have described Lang as a “veteran trouble-maker”.[10] A further effect of his Irish bias is that Keneally did not acknowledge other groups that became known for republicanism, such as atheists[11] and other “radicals”.[12] Keneally’s strong republicanism is also clear. He does not detail why Henry Parkes became a monarchist, despite Parkes being a significant enough figure to become known as the ‘Grand Old Man of New South Wales’,[13] and this exclusion denies the reader a chance to see Parkes’ view. Keneally quotes the words of Deniehy regarding Parkes’ defection – ‘There is too much Englishman-ism about him’ yet does not present any reasons for Parkes’ change. This quotation is actually incorrect; Deniehy’s actual words were ‘too much, not of the Englishman in him, but of “Englishmanism” about him’.[14] This alteration changes the meaning, leading the reader of Keneally’s text to associate Parkes with the Monarchists, when Parkes was seeking to promote democracy,[15] be it republican or not. Bias for the republican side is also shown through soft words used whilst describing key points of the republican cause, such as the “birth” of The Republican, whilst loyalists are described as having words “falling from [their] mouths”.

Throughout the chapter, Keneally clearly displays the significant actions of the republican movement in Australia. Through thoroughly conveying the reasons for an Australian republic and looking in detail at some republican leaders the author gives a strong case for there always being a strong current of republicanism in Australia. Keneally’s argument is however weakened considerably as he does not mention the nationalists’ viewpoints and shows a significant favouritism for the republican movement. Keneally does not present a strong reason for the decline in republican sentiment after federation. The emphasis on Irish republicanism in the text as a result of his education somewhat discredits his case. Keneally does provide a useful insight into Irish republicanism; however his text does not represent republicanism as a whole or the wider republic debate.


Footnotes

[1] The People who made Australia Great, 1st ed. (Sydney: Collins Publishers Australia, 1988), page 277. [2] ibid, page 279 [3] P. Spearritt, D. Walker and G. Bolton, AUS1020: ‘Democracy and Nation’ Semester Two 2010, (Melbourne: National Centre for Australian Studies, 2010), 6. [4] Radio National, ‘The Republican Idea, Democracy and Nation, Program 1’ [5] P. Spearritt, D. Walker and G. Bolton, AUS1020: ‘Democracy and Nation’ Semester Two 2010, (Melbourne: National Centre for Australian Studies, 2010), 6. [6] Robin Hughes, ‘Thomas Keneally – Interview Transcript’, Australian Biography, created 9 September 2002, accessed 7 August 2010, http://www.australianbiography.gov.au/subjects/keneally/interview1.html [7] Bob Birrell, Federation: The Secret Story, Duffy and Snellgrove, Sydney, 2001, 136 [8] Radio National, ‘The Republican Idea, Democracy and Nation, Program 1’ [9] Hughes, http://www.australianbiography.gov.au/subjects/keneally/interview1.html [10] P. Spearritt, D. Walker and G. Bolton, AUS1020: ‘Democracy and Nation’ Semester Two 2010, (Melbourne: National Centre for Australian Studies, 2010), 2. [11] Ibid, page 5. [12] Bruce Mansfield, ‘The Background to Radical Republicism in New South Wales in the Eighteen Eighties’, Historical Studies, vol 5, no 20, May 1953, 338-348 [13] The People who made Australia Great, Page 273 [14] Australian Dictionary of Biography Online Edition, “Parkes, Sir Henry (1815 - 1896),” Australian National University, Canberra, http://www.adb.online.anu.edu.au/biogs/A050455b.htm, (accessed August 11, 2010). [15] The People who made Australia Great, Page 174

For a full bibliography and a printable version of this essay please click here.

This essay is copyright © William Kulich 2010.

---

Get in-depth reviews delivered straight to your inbox – subscribe to the OCSN mailing list today!

image

Monday, August 9, 2010

On A Monday: The most outdated video you will see this election

Digg this

Cast you mind back to the start of November 2007. John Howard was Prime Minister, Kevin Rudd was trying to depose the 11-year-old Liberal National Coalition Government and Peter Garrett made himself known for his “short and jocular” conversations.

Three years, three Opposition Leaders and two Prime Ministers later we have the 2010 Election Campaign. We have had the apology to the Stolen Generations, the Global Financial Crisis, the lowest Newspoll “Preferred Prime Minister” rating in history for former Opposition Leader Brendan Nelson and the “death” of WorkChoices.

We have borne witness to the defeat of the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme, the Resource Super Profits Tax that finally toppled Kevin Rudd from the Prime Minister’s podium, the beginnings of the National Broadband Network and a notable rise in the popularity of The Australian Greens.

Federal Parliament has waved goodbye to John Howard, Peter Costello, Brendan Nelson, Kim Beazley and Mark Vaile, and Lindsay Tanner announcing his imminent departure.

My, how Australia’s political landscape has changed! So, to kick off One Cuckoo Short of a Nest’s planned commentary of the 2010 federal election, we will be stepping through an amusing musical time warp.

This video by Australian musical comedy trio the Axis of Awesome dates back to the last federal election campaign. Yes, it’s the Election 07 Rap Battle! So voters, throw on your “bling”, get down to “da hood” and break the election down “old school”! Or just press play.

Wasn’t that a wonderful walk down memory lane!

Maybe it’s not quite right to say that this video is outdated. This campaign Kevin Rudd, John Howard and Peter Costello have all come back in to the spotlight, although arguably Kevin Rudd never really left centre stage in the first place. Joining them there has been Andrew Peacock, John Hewson, Bob Hawke, Paul Keating, Malcolm Fraser and Mark Latham. This election has turned out to be an all-stars event!

Twelve days out from the election – a lot could still happen on the campaign trail. Don’t forget though, base your vote off policy as well as publicity. Check out party websites and even Wikipedia for more information on each of the parties contesting this election.

---

Get your politics delivered straight to your inbox – subscribe to the OCSN mailing list today!

image

Monday, June 28, 2010

Biography: Daniel Mannix and the British Influence on Australia

Digg this

This essay is intended to explore the influence of the British Empire on the thoughts and actions of former Melbourne Catholic Archbishop Dr. Daniel Mannix. A properly formatted printable version of the essay with a full bibliography can be downloaded by clicking here.

---

Daniel Mannix Statue - Melbourne

Daniel Mannix, Melbourne’s Catholic Archbishop from 1917 until his death in 1963 had a significant impact on, and acted passionately in response to the British influence in Australia. In his life which spanned just four months short of a century, Mannix was involved in areas that the church had traditionally avoided, speaking on politics and popular cultural issues. His anti-conscription, Irish nationalist beliefs represented the opposite of the Australian Government’s pro-Britain message and led Mannix to be Prime Minister Billy Hughes’ main opposition in the conscription debate during the First World War. Unpopular in some areas of society due to his pro-Irish and anti-Empire sentiments which were inspired by growing up in Ireland,[1] Mannix had a vision of Australia free of the shackles of the Empire. Mannix’s rise to become a significant public figure is one which changed Australia in many ways, especially in cutting a clear path for the young nation to move away from the influence of Britain.

Daniel Mannix was born County Cork, Ireland, in 1864. In Ireland he was educated at and later became president of Maynooth Catholic College. Mannix was a senator of the Royal University of Ireland, where he was awarded an honorary doctorate of laws.[2] He migrated to Australia in 1913 to become the coadjutor to Melbourne’s Archbishop of the time T J Carr, but retained his Irish nationalism which helped define his anti-British stance. Mannix was heavily involved in politics,[3] showing a great interest in many public issues in Australia ranging from conscription and Australia’s position in the Empire during World War One, to workers’ rights, the White Australia Policy, the economy and communism later in the century[4].

Mannix became a significant figure in the politics of Australia whilst seeking to achieve what he saw as a better Australia for the Australian people. An example of Mannix’s extensive political interests in areas not in church control, and the extent of his patriotism for Australia, arises from the Great Depression of the 1930s. Mannix used the Great Depression as a platform from which to advocate the need for greater social change to, he argued, avoid “much trouble and perhaps revolution” in Australia.[5] During that decade Mannix also stood with Prime Minister Menzies to condemn war, describing himself as a pacifist “in the real sense.”[6] He was also strongly against what he called “trade wars”, which was inclusive of both the First and Second World Wars.[7] Mannix frequently questioned Australia’s involvement in these wars, implying that they were the wars of the British and that Australia should not follow its lead. Through much of his life Mannix was toward the left of politics, which was unusual for a bishop of the time,[8] however he moved slightly away from this political field later in his life, joining with the western world’s abhorrence of communism whilst retaining his anti-Empire position.[9] Mannix’s interest in politics, coupled with his belief that catholic organisations should be free to function without the intervention of state bishops whilst driving his own movement, made a case for people to claim that he was seeking some form of civil power.[10] He was frequently connected to the post-Hughes Labor party and labour movement, assisting in the removal of all signs of communism from the unions.[11] He did however deny this connection, and speaking to the press around the time of the 1954 Labor Party split stated that “the Catholic Church has never aimed to control the Labor Party – or any other party.”[12] Mannix justified his continued involvement in politics despite being a member of the clergy by saying that “the Church [has] expressed its viewpoint on public policy… no more than… non-Catholic religious bodies”.[13] He also argued that his anti-Empire comments and actions were as an Australian citizen participating in public debate and not as a member of the Catholic Church.[14] Despite his apparent intentions, his words had a particularly uniting affect on Catholics in Melbourne.[15] His famous Australian Nationalist mantra coupled with his prominent position in the Catholic Church gave his words greater power in public debate. His speeches provided a clear, Australian Nationalist alternative to Empire loyalism. This was out of line with the Catholic Church’s history in Australia, as it had not made significant attempts to join with the British Empire even prior to Mannix becoming Archbishop. Not long after his arrival in Australia Mannix delivered a sermon at the consecration of a Brisbane church, of which even the design defied Anglo-Australian design conventions.[16] This gave Mannix a backing which already did not overtly support the British.

Another area of British influence that saw Mannix become involved in politics in the 1950s was the White Australia Policy. The White Australia Policy was implemented to encourage immigration to Australia purely from European countries, with the primary intention being to encourage British migration with the subsidisation of British travel.[17] Mannix was opposed to this single stream of immigration, describing the policy as “crude” and saying that Australia had much to learn from other races.[18] His position opposed both the Australian and British immigration models which had retained Australia as being for the British for half a century, and also defied the ideal of Australians being a British people. When presenting a speech on the White Australia Policy in 1949, Mannix spoke as an Australian seeking to establish that “there is no colour bar in Australia”.[19] This is a sign that his Australian Nationalism mixed with his negative perception of the British Empire had placed him in a position where he truly felt part of Australian society, and the pro-British nature of Australia’s immigration policy provoked him to act against it.

Mannix rose to national fame during the conscription debates of the First World War. The issue of conscription arose shortly after his arrival in Australia and quickly exposed Mannix’s interest in involving himself in politics. The debates also showed the new-found nationalistic spirit he had for Australia, which would define his position in the conscription debates and in the rest of his life. Mannix’s first address was in the same vein as that of Melbourne Irish Cardinal Moran, in stating that he would “claim to be – and as time goes on I hope to justify my claim to be considered – a good Australian.” [20] His nationalistic enthusiasm for Australia, coupled with his Irish past drove his opposition to British Empire influence in Australia. In 1916 he objected to the British Government’s execution of the rebels in the Irish Easter Rebellion[21], and he supported Éamon de Valera’s party in Ireland, of which both British and Australian parliaments disapproved.[22] This is a further indication that his roots in Ireland influenced his perception of the United Kingdom and encouraged him to guide Australia away from its power. Mannix was continually frustrated by the actions of the British in his homeland, not participating in civic engagements during the 1920s in protest to the British policy toward Northern Ireland.[23] His Irish nationalism and the standing he took on many issues as a result of its influence made him a figurehead for Australian nationalists. He made his position on the Empire, and where his political allegiances lay, clear with his landmark phrase “Australia first, the Empire second”.[24] Because of this criticism of the Empire and conscription and his pro-Irish Nationalism stance, Mannix attracted the attention of the government censor during the First World War, as was any person who spoke out about the war and Empire.[25] In his first year as Archbishop, Mannix wrote the first foreword for the nationalistic Christian Australian magazine called Australia, in which he questioned Australia’s interests in the war in Europe. In this he said that he believed “that if the war had been in the hands of the [Australian] people, there would have been no war”. Mannix’s actions had some sway in the Australian public’s perception of the Empire, and in its celebration. The great display of British Empire pride that was Empire Day, established to celebrate not just the birthday of Australia’s late first Queen but also to celebrate all things British, can have its loss of importance to Australians traced back to the actions of Daniel Mannix. The celebration started to lose its shine as an apolitical celebration of Empire pride as a result of the bitter squabbles over Australia’s direction, and conscription, during the First World War. As a result Empire Day came to represent less about the Empire, and more about the exclusive celebration of conservative attitudes in Australia.[26] As a major figure in that debate, which encouraged the degredation of loyal Empire sentiment, Mannix’s words had an effect on a wider population of Australians than the predominantly middle class Irish in Australia[27] who he most directly represented. The Australian people grew tired of the Empire during the conscription debates which Mannix participated in during the First World War.[28] The collapse of overt Empire loyalism could be said to have reached its conclusion shortly after Mannix’s death, when in 1967 New South Wales led the states to move Empire Day to the less fanatically celebrated Queen’s Birthday Weekend.[29]

As a result of his high profile involvement in the politics of the First World War Mannix became one of the more influential public figures in Australia. Archbishop Mannix and his predecessor Archbishop Carr, were decidedly different in their approaches to the church and state issues. During the First World War, the Hughes Labor government backed conscription to meet with British demands for a greater Australian presence in the war in Europe. Under Carr, who was Archbishop during the first referendum on conscription, the church did not formally enter into the politics of the debate. Carr stated on the 10th of October 1916 that “conscription was a purely state matter; the Church neither advocates nor opposes it”[30]. However by this time Mannix had already delivered a speech that entered him into the thick of the conscription debate, a debate which would arise a second time in the first year of his becoming Archbishop. Taking the chance to speak on the matter at the opening of a Clifton Hill bazaar in September 1916, Mannix expressed his concerns about conscription. Where Hughes would argue that Australia was “part of the British Empire” [31], Mannix argued that Australians should not be so affected by the war in Europe, and “that Australia has already done [more than] her full share” for the war. His speech was steeped in patriotic descriptions of Australians, describing Australian soldiers as “brave” whilst suggesting that all Australians are “peace loving people”.[32] This clashed strongly with Hughes’ pro-Empire stance, putting him directly in the firing line of the Prime Minister. Mannix was the only prominent public figure of the “no” side in the conscription debates, becoming the champion of the anti-conscriptionists. His renowned wit and sarcasm matched that of Hughes’ wordsmanship, giving the disorganised “no” camp a strong message.[33] Conscription was Hughes’ response to the demands of the British to increase the Australian troop numbers. In line with his pro-British stance, Hughes attacked Mannix and other anti-conscriptionists, suggesting that they were prepared to “desert” the Empire. This helped fuel the pro-conscriptionsits and Empire loyalists in their claims of Mannix being a Sinn Feiner.[34] There was also strong opposition to Archbishop Mannix’s position on conscription in the Protestant population, which commonly supported the side of the Empire.[35] However the effect of Mannix’s very public, powerful counter-campaign to the expected response to British troop demands[36] was that it presented a clear alternative to the Empire for the people to consider. This encouraged the Australian people to see Australia as Australian, not just a British colony. Despite Mannix’s position on conscription striking deep into the hearts of Australian nationalists, who saw conscription as a threat to their freedom and the nation’s independence,[37] his arguments occasionally struck particular discord with some areas of Australian society.

Mannix was not immune from criticism and sometimes attracted public distaste for the members of the Catholic Church through his actions.[38] He earned particular unpopularity in some sections of society during the First World War when he described the war as “a trade war”, an “ordinary, sordid trade war”.[39] Not only did this challenge the United Kingdom’s motives in a still predominantly British Australia, but it also detached Mannix himself from people who had fought in the war, or had seen their sons die for the Empire in the war.[40] Mannix received a great amount of criticism from Prime Minister Hughes, who described the success of the anti-conscription campaign in the first conscription referendum as “a triumph for the… anti-British.”[41] This attack was not only directed at the most public figure of the “no” campaign, it was also directed specifically at the people of the Catholic Church. When re-opening the debate for the second referendum, Hughes accused Catholics in Queensland’s Cabinet as being instrumental to the first referendum’s failure, implying that Mannix was responsible for mobilising Catholics against conscription.[42] This accusation proved that Mannix had made a significant contribution to the Australian conscription debate and to Australian culture itself, shifting it away from unquestioning support of the Empire. Despite his attacks being based on the only two occasions that Mannix had addressed the issue during the first referendum,[43] Hughes saw Mannix as a threat to the Empire, and with this accusation pulled him further into the debate in an attempt to better counter Mannix. This also made the debate a sectarian one, drawing in a great political divide between the pro-conscription Protestant Christians and the anti-conscription Catholics.[44] Pro-Empire Pamphlets were introduced with titles like “Is the Papacy anti-British?”[45], further dividing the debate along sectarian lines. Under Archbishop Mannix, the Irish St. Patricks Day Parades took on a political identity, steeped in Irish and Australian nationalism in defiance of Britain.[46] Almost immediately after arriving in Australia, Mannix encouraged Irish republicanism in Catholic schools and parishes, ultimately leading to priests and other leaders accepting Mannix’s criticism of the Empire.

Mannix had a continued effect on Australian society throughout his life and his actions shaped an Australia distinctly unique from Britain. Mannix’s contribution to Australian society was so great that his reaction to British society, amongst other aspects of his life, have been explored in popular culture. Such works include Barry Oakley’s play The Feet of Daniel Mannix (1975) and Frank Hardy’s novel Power without Glory, in which he was satirically portrayed as Archbishop Daniel Malone. The Empire was not considered a good influence for Australia by Daniel Mannix due to his Irish history. Mannix saw the British as oppressive; a viewpoint which he carried to Australia when he emigrated from Ireland. A nine foot high statue of Daniel Mannix, erected in 1997, now stands outside St. Patrick’s Cathedral in Melbourne.[47] This large erection of Mannix’s image overlooks the Victorian Parliament House, presenting parliament with the larger than life image that Mannix had shown to national politics, and to Britain, when he was alive.


Footnotes

[1] The People who made Australia Great, 1st ed. (Sydney: Collins Publishers Australia, 1988), page 147. [2] Australian Dictionary of Biography Online Edition, “Mannix, Daniel (1864 – 1963),” Australian National University, Canberra, http://www.adb.online.anu.edu.au/biogs/A100391b.htm, (accessed May 22, 2010). [3] The People who made Australia Great, page 146. [4] James G. Murtagh, Australia: The Catholic Chapter, 3rd ed. , (Melbourne: The Polding Press, 1969), on the economy, 174; on Communism, 177; on the White Australia Policy, 249; on the economy, 206. [5] ibid, 174. [6] ibid, 187. [7] ibid, 186. [8] The People who made Australia Great, page 146. [9] ibid, page 146. [10] ibid, page 147. [11] ibid, page 147. [12] James G. Murtagh, Australia: The Catholic Chapter, 219. [13] ibid, 219. [14] The People who made Australia Great,148. [15] The Encyclopaedia of Melbourne, 1st ed. , 371. [16] Edmund Campion, Australian Catholics (Ringwood: Viking, 1987), 80 [17] P. Spearritt and D.Walker, AUS1010: ‘Out of Empire’ Semester One 2010, (Melbourne: National Centre for Australian Studies, 2010), 70. [18] James G. Murtagh, Australia: The Catholic Chapter, 249. [19] ibid, 249. [20] Campion, Australian Catholics, page 81 [21] The People who made Australia Great, page 147 [22] ibid, page 147 [23] ibid, page 147 [24] Campion, Australian Catholics, 84  [25] The Encyclopaedia of Melbourne, 1st ed. , 756 [26] P. Spearritt and D. Walker (eds.), Australian Popular Culture (George Allen and Unwin: Sydney, 1979), 36 [27] The Encyclopaedia of Melbourne, 1st ed. , 370 [28] Spearritt and Walker, ed. , Australian Popular Culture, page 36 [29] ibid, page34 [30] James G. Murtagh, Australia: The Catholic Chapter, 158. [31] Deborah Gare & David Ritter, Making Australian History: Perspectives on the Past Since 1788 (Thomson: Melbourne, 2008), 319 [32] No author stated, “Address by Dr. Mannix.,” Argus (Melbourne), September 18, 1916, first edition. [33] Donald Horne, Billy Hughes: Prime Minister of Australia 1915-1923 (Black Inc.: Melbourne, 2000), 128 [34] Donald Horne, Billy Hughes: Prime Minister of Australia 1915-1923 (Black Inc.: Melbourne, 2000), 132 [35] P. Spearritt and D.Walker, AUS1010: ‘Out of Empire’ Semester One 2010, (Melbourne: National Centre for Australian Studies, 2010), 23 [36] Donald Horne, Billy Hughes: Prime Minister of Australia 1915-1923 (Black Inc.: Melbourne, 2000), 11 [37] James G. Murtagh, Australia: The Catholic Chapter, 158. [38] Campion, Australian Catholics, 87. [39] The People who made Australia Great, page 147. [40] ibid, page 147. [41] Campion, Australian Catholics, 83 [42] ibid, 83 [43] ibid, 83 [44] P. Spearritt and D.Walker, AUS1010: ‘Out of Empire’ Semester One 2010, (Melbourne: National Centre for Australian Studies, 2010), 23 [45] Campion, Australian Catholics, 84 [46] The Encyclopaedia of Melbourne, 1st ed. , 371 [47] James Gobbo, "Victoria's Governor pays tribute to Dr Mannix," AD2000 12, no. 4 (1999), http://www.ad2000.com.au/articles/1999/may1999p10_352.html.

---

For a full bibliography and a printable version of this essay please click here.

This essay is copyright © William Kulich 2010.

image

Tuesday, January 26, 2010

G’day Australia

Digg this

scrossAustralia – known around the world for its droughts, accent and flies. Australia’s national anthem Advance Australia Fair– known around the country… or not.

Australia has an odd reputation for its citizens not knowing all the words to its national anthem. However could we be forgiven as the song has only officially been our national anthem since 1984? And there’s the fact that the anthem was changed on two occasions.

The national anthem in its present state has two verses. It may come as a surprise to many that Advance Australia Fair was originally four verses long. The original first verse has been kept, however verse two, which looked at the British discovering Australia (not that they were actually first, mind!), was replaced by a new second verse when the song was sung at federation. This verse was later changed again when the song became the national anthem in 1984.

The present second verse is an amalgamation of the themes of the original second, third and fourth verses. The third verse of the original, pre-federation version looked at how other nations see Australia and its English colonisation. Verse four looked at how the Australian people would defend the country if it were attacked.

Throughout all these changes, the simple tune has remained the same.

Advance Australia Fair has not stood unopposed as our national anthem however. There is a movement which wishes that the anthem should be changed to Waltzing Matilda, which has scored highly in polls on preferred national anthem.

In 2007 filmmaker Curtis Levy ran for a seat in the senate in New South Wales, promising that if elected he would fight for the anthem to change to Waltzing Matilda. A program which will air at 9.25 tonight on ABC1 looks at his campaign.

Australia Day marks arrival of Captain Cook’s First Fleet in 1788. The celebration of the occasion has been unwelcome in some Aboriginal groups who see the event as Invasion Day.

Another debate that regularly arises on Australia Day, especially this year with a visit last week from future monarch of Australia Prince William, is that of an Australian Republic. This is however, according to Deputy Prime Minister Julia Gillard, not on the Labor Government’s agenda at the moment.

However, for the moment at least, our anthem and day are both here and today is the day to celebrate them – so have fun this Australia Day!

Friday, January 1, 2010

On A Friday: HaPpY NeW YeAr!

Digg this

Good morning and welcome to 2010!

Ten years ago a new millennium had just started, nine years ago it was the start of the 21st century, and one year ago was the start of 2009.

What got us where in the year just passed? Here is a light hearted review of 2009 which looks at a select number of events that were in some way significant (or not) to the year just passed.

OCSN 2009 Revisited Image Preview

FILE DETAILS:
Format: PDF
Size: 1.07MB
Full Link: http://onecuckoosnest.we
bs.com/www.onecuckoosn
est.com/One%20Cuckoo%
20Short%20of%20a%
20Nest%20-%202009%
20Revisited.pdf

 

 

 


So how did you find the last decade? America’s Pew Research Center recently released the newest instalment of a decade-by-decade rating of the last 50 years. In this, Americans’ perception of the 2000s has shown to be the lowest of any decade yet. Exactly 50% of those surveyed said their impression of the decade was generally negative. This is a jump from the same statistic for the 1990s, in which only 19% ranked the decade poorly.

This high negative is best explained by another statistic released by the Pew Center, which shows the November 11th terrorist attacks to be most widely considered the “most important event of the decade”.

But has the decade really been as bad as this research has shown? It really depends on who you ask. The research mentioned above is only a study of a fraction of the American population (779 people) and doesn’t represent any other country around the world.

One good piece of information to take from this study is that many of the people surveyed think that next decade will be better than the 2000s. Given the rating of the 2000s that won’t be hard!

ocsn

Sunday, November 22, 2009

Cabinet Unpacked: Peter Garrett

Digg this

Cabinet Unpacked :: Peter Garrett

This post looks at Midnight Oil Front Man-turn-Labor party MP Peter Garrett.

 

 

Background

Portfolio: Minister for the Environment, Heritage and the Arts Held position since: 2007
Constituency: Kingsford Smith (NSW) In Parliament since: 2004
21st Minister for the Environment, Heritage and the Arts House: House of Representatives
Peter Garrett became famous as the lead singer for popular Australian protest band Midnight Oil. He has been the president of the Australian Conservation Foundation and involved with Greenpeace.   

Midnight Oil was famous for its political statements, including performing at the 2000 Sydney Olympics wearing clothes opposing former Prime Minister John Howard’s refusal to apologise to the Aboriginal Stolen Generation.

Garrett first tried to become involved in politics in 1984, when he stood for a Senate position for the Nuclear Disarmament Party. He was not elected.

Garrett joined the Australian Labor Party in 2004, winning the Labor safe seat of Kingsford Smith and increased the Labor majority in the electorate. According to the Australian Electoral Commission website, Garrett also received a 4.24% swing towards him in the 2007 election.

As a shadow minister in the Labor Opposition between 2004 and 2007, Garrett held the portfolio of Shadow Minister for Climate Change, Environment, Heritage and the Arts. When the Labor party gained power in the 2007 election, Garrett lost the Climate Change portfolio to Penny Wong.

Garrett has been commented as back-flipping on his opposition to Uranium mining and the Pine Gap US-Australian Defence Facility. Garratt has explained that he will fight these issues internally, however will accept the Labor caucus’ vote. Garrett told 2UE radio broadcaster Steve Price that the Labor party would change its policies if elected, possibly a reason why he lost the climate change portfolio. Garrett described this as a “short and jocular conversation.” Greens leader Bob Brown described Garrett as a “sell out”, saying that “the Labor Party machine has taken him over and turned him into an anti-green campaigner."

(Most information from: Source)

Present Issues 

  • Environmental issues (largely excluding Climate Change): This is part of his job as environment minister.
  • Arts related: All forms of art including music, dance and dramatic arts. This includes funding and recognition of each.
  • Heritage related: Maintaining, protecting and educating about Australia’s history.

Recent action includes:

  • $32 million in funding for “non-lethal whale research” in response to Japan’s deployment of a fleet of whaling ships heading for the Southern Ocean. (19th November 2009)
  • Recognition of Dr Ron Radford for “his selection as a recipient of the French Honour, L'Ordre des Arts et Lettres.” (19th November 2009)
  • Giving $439,928 in funding toward protecting Australia’s underwater cultural heritage. (20th November 2009)
  • Commissioning and acting on reports regarding environmental issues, such as the Montara oil leak. (30th October 2009)

Significant Speeches
Peter Garrett has not yet made any pivotal speeches since becoming a politician, however his maiden speech to the House of Representatives marks his entry to Parliament. A transcript of this can be accessed from the Parliament of Australia website.

Quotations

  • "This separation is a principle I firmly believe in, while also believing that someone's personal values should and do inform one's day to day thought processes and decision-making." - Garrett explaining the influence of his Christian beliefs on his actions and opinions with reference to the separation of church and state. (From: http://www.petergarrett.com.au/235.aspx)
  • “Team player.” - Garrett describing how he will stand for his beliefs in the party room, however will accept the vote of caucus.
  • "Short and jocular." - How Garrett described his conversation with 2UE broadcaster Steve Price in which he said the Labor party would change its policies once it gains power.

OCSN

Friday, November 6, 2009

What's On The Box?

Digg this
With the launch of ABC 3 scheduled for the 4th of December this year, I have compiled a timeline of Australian free-to-air television channels. This shows all national channel movements from when TCN (now part of the Nine Network) went to air with the famous words "Good evening, and welcome to television", to the imminent ABC3. Network Ten is set to introduce another new channel (Greenguide, 5th November 2009), however as I know little about this I have not included it on this timeline.
Take a look - ABC 3 is not the ABC's first digital kids channel...


(View larger PDF)

In a related piece of news, Channel Nine have announced that Hey Hey It's Saturday will return for its first series in eleven years early next year. The program will air for 10-15 episodes starting in February.

Most Popular This Week on OCSN

Save the net from censorship!



Counter