Published 25 November 2009 · Main Posts why whites have a material stake in Aboriginal rights, part two Jeff Sparrow Last week, I wrote a piece for New Matilda comparing the Right-wing outrage over the apology to the (black) Stolen Generation with the almost universal acclaim for the apology to the (white) Forgotten Australians. The article concluded like this: But there’s another point to be made about the apology to the Forgotten Australians, and it’s a much more uplifting one. The ceremony conducted by way of reparation for their suffering received bipartisan political support and the universal backing of the Australian media. That’s at least in part a consequence of the apology to the Stolen Generation. Because that gesture was made — and was broadly backed by Australians — it was far easier for a similar response to Ray Carlile and his peers. The opponents of an apology argued that it would set whites and blacks against each other. In fact, it did exactly the opposite. Justice, by its nature, is inclusive, not exclusive. The recognition of a wrong done to Indigenous people set a precedent that made the recognition of a wrong done to whites easier rather than harder. That’s why we all have an interest in the struggle for Aboriginal rights, no matter how traumatic an honest assessment of the past might seem. A government that can neglect Indigenous Australia will find it easier to do the same to others. So, too, the reverse: with every step towards justice for Aborigines making justice more real and immediate for everyone. You can see the same phenomenon in the Rudd government’s new welfare policy. The Age reports today that: WELFARE recipients of all races will be forced to have their money managed by Centrelink unless they can demonstrate personal responsibility, under dramatic changes proposed by Families Minister Jenny Macklin. The move is a sweeping extension of rules applied to indigenous people in the Northern Territory as part of the Howard government’s emergency intervention of 2007. Ms Macklin wants to restore the operation of the Racial Discrimination Act, which was suspended in the intervention to apply the tough welfare scheme only to Aborigines. To keep the tough rules for indigenous communities, she has extended them to non-indigenous people. The imposition of an outrageous Victorian-era paternalism, in which the poor lose the right to make decisions about their own lives, was only initially possible because of racism. There is, after all, a long tradition of Aborigines being treated as children (oh, but always in their very best interests, naturally). But with the intervention in place — and, what’s more, with it accepted and even applauded by many people who should have known better — the extension of welfare quarantines became far more politically palatable. Interestingly, the new measures will not apply to aged pension recipients. Why? Because, the Age says, of ‘an outcry from pensioners affected by the NT intervention who had spent a lifetime paying taxes’. Though the relevance of paying taxes might not be altogether clear, it’s evident that — who would have thunk it? — NT pensioners didn’t warm to the idea of the government determining how their pension might be spent, despite the assurances by Jenny Macklin and other experts that this was a wonderful way of helping low income earners. The policy won’t apply to the age old pension because, as John Howard knew, the aged are a relatively powerful political constituency. Aborigines and the long-term unemployed? Not so much. The intervention was an extraordinary policy, made in flagrant opposition to the reports into child abuse that allegedly sparked it. And now the consequences are becoming clear. In these times, it’s worth remembering Ben Franklin’s famous adage: we need to hang together because if we don’t we will assuredly be hanged separately. Jeff Sparrow Jeff Sparrow is a Walkley Award-winning writer, broadcaster and former editor of Overland. More by Jeff Sparrow › Overland is a not-for-profit magazine with a proud history of supporting writers, and publishing ideas and voices often excluded from other places. If you like this piece, or support Overland’s work in general, please subscribe or donate. Related articles & Essays First published in Overland Issue 228 10 November 202311 November 2023 · Subscriberthon 2023 On the final day of Subscriberthon, Overland’s most important members get to have their say Editorial Team BORIS A quick guide to another year of Overland, from your trusty feline, Boris. I liked the ginger cat story, though it made my human cry. I liked the talking cat, too, but I’m definitely in the “not wasting my time learning to talk” camp. But reading is good. And writing is fun, though it’s been challenging […] 1 First published in Overland Issue 228 9 November 20239 November 2023 · Subscriberthon 2023 On the second-last day of Subscriberthon, Overland’s co-chief editor Evelyn Araluen speaks truth to power Editorial Team To my friends and comrades, I’m not sure if there’s language to communicate how this last month has utterly changed me. This time a few weeks ago the busyness and chaos of bricolage arts and academic labour had so efficiently distracted me from my anxiety about the upcoming referendum that I forgot to prepare myself for its inevitable conclusion.