The National Anthem
- Thread starter Demps
- Start date
weststigers
Well-known member
@rustycage
I view it differently...I feel it's racist to have such a low expectation of people to think that the reason people don't get ahead is because of the colour of their skin.
Aboriginal people are not disabled. They are human beings like the rest of us. The problem is in the messaging that only serves to create a greater divide.
This white demon narrative creates situations like when Ben Barba is an absolute pork chop, yet he calls the coppers racist. I don't blame him. He'd been told his whole life that the white man is out to get him and he uses it as an excuse for that behaviour.
Grab any kid from a young age and tell them for the rest of their life that they haven't got a chance because it's all stacked against them. White, black or purple, that kid is going through life with no hope or motivation and won't participate in wider society. The messaging is stealing hope from an entire generation of indigenous kids. It's wrong and they need to be encouraged to participate.
I get it...some Aboriginals may view singing the anthem the same as say, a Jew would view singing a Nazi Party song. It would be conflicting to say the least, but we need to separate ourselves from the Government of today and the Government back then. A human being will never be able to move forward in their life if they harbour feelings of hate towards others. I feel this "white hate" is holding many back and creates an us vs them mentality.
The question begs...what needs to be done before we can say there is no "white privilege" anymore? What solutions do you have? Because replacing old racism with new racism directed at whites isn't helping anybody.
I view it differently...I feel it's racist to have such a low expectation of people to think that the reason people don't get ahead is because of the colour of their skin.
Aboriginal people are not disabled. They are human beings like the rest of us. The problem is in the messaging that only serves to create a greater divide.
This white demon narrative creates situations like when Ben Barba is an absolute pork chop, yet he calls the coppers racist. I don't blame him. He'd been told his whole life that the white man is out to get him and he uses it as an excuse for that behaviour.
Grab any kid from a young age and tell them for the rest of their life that they haven't got a chance because it's all stacked against them. White, black or purple, that kid is going through life with no hope or motivation and won't participate in wider society. The messaging is stealing hope from an entire generation of indigenous kids. It's wrong and they need to be encouraged to participate.
I get it...some Aboriginals may view singing the anthem the same as say, a Jew would view singing a Nazi Party song. It would be conflicting to say the least, but we need to separate ourselves from the Government of today and the Government back then. A human being will never be able to move forward in their life if they harbour feelings of hate towards others. I feel this "white hate" is holding many back and creates an us vs them mentality.
The question begs...what needs to be done before we can say there is no "white privilege" anymore? What solutions do you have? Because replacing old racism with new racism directed at whites isn't helping anybody.
Just my 2c ... the actual words we sing are not the original version from the 1800's.
Australians all let us rejoice
For we are young and free
We've golden soil and wealth for toil
Our home is girt by sea
Our land abounds in nature's gifts
Of beauty rich and rare
In history's page, let every stage
Advance Australia Fair
In joyful strains then let us sing
Advance Australia Fair
Nothing racist about it .. it just doesn't make reference to Aboriginals. However it also doesn't make reference to tall people, blonde people, english people, jewish people, hetrosexual people, or tigers supporters. It just makes reference to ... people.
So while its not racist, I personally don't have a problem with Aboriginal players not wanting to sing it. That's their right, and when in doubt, always err to the side of freedom.
Australians all let us rejoice
For we are young and free
We've golden soil and wealth for toil
Our home is girt by sea
Our land abounds in nature's gifts
Of beauty rich and rare
In history's page, let every stage
Advance Australia Fair
In joyful strains then let us sing
Advance Australia Fair
Nothing racist about it .. it just doesn't make reference to Aboriginals. However it also doesn't make reference to tall people, blonde people, english people, jewish people, hetrosexual people, or tigers supporters. It just makes reference to ... people.
So while its not racist, I personally don't have a problem with Aboriginal players not wanting to sing it. That's their right, and when in doubt, always err to the side of freedom.
TheDaBoss
Well-known member
@Abraham said in [The National Anthem](/post/1017267) said:
it does say 'we' though, and we means everyone
@TheDaBoss
It does.
Without getting too philosophical, you know you have it great in a country when the most pressing issue of the day is a forensic examination of the national anthem's phrasing.
No murderous dictators to deal with, no war, no children dying in the streets, no poverty crisis, no civil unrest.
When we have things so good, as we do in Australia for the most part, people look to trivial matters like a song to get upset over. In a funny way, its reassuring.
It does.
Without getting too philosophical, you know you have it great in a country when the most pressing issue of the day is a forensic examination of the national anthem's phrasing.
No murderous dictators to deal with, no war, no children dying in the streets, no poverty crisis, no civil unrest.
When we have things so good, as we do in Australia for the most part, people look to trivial matters like a song to get upset over. In a funny way, its reassuring.
balmain boy
Well-known member
Who cares what Walker says or does? Half the players from both teams don't sing along either. Who knows if they just don't know the words or can't be bothered...
The only difference is Walker has a meaningful reason for not singing.
The only difference is Walker has a meaningful reason for not singing.
weststigers
Well-known member
@Abraham I agree. Nothing offensive in it. I'd support an aboriginal version like they do in Sth Africa and New Zealand, but as others have said, there may be too many languages to cover everyone - then we'd have another drama on our hands.
I just find it strange that they won't sing the anthem, but they're happy to play for the jersey.
I just find it strange that they won't sing the anthem, but they're happy to play for the jersey.
balmain boy
Well-known member
@weststigers said in [The National Anthem](/post/1017280) said:
Really, why? Why shouldn't players want to play at the highest level of the game. And they an identify with being from NSW or QLD.
Not singing a song (which has nothing to do with their state and which doesn't represent them or their people) seems totally reasonable.
2 completely separate matters.
TheDaBoss
Well-known member
imagine if Walzing matilda ended up as the anthem,
love that song
love that song
@TheDaBoss
You're asking for a world of trouble there my friend.
It deals with a male lead character - so its obviously misogynistic.
It doesn't mention first nations people - so its therefore racist.
It glorifies the kidnapping of animals - PETA would not be impressed !
And the swagman ends up comitting suidice. You would need to post the lifeline number at the bottom of the anthem every time it was printed.
Lets just stick with Advance Australia Fair.
You're asking for a world of trouble there my friend.
It deals with a male lead character - so its obviously misogynistic.
It doesn't mention first nations people - so its therefore racist.
It glorifies the kidnapping of animals - PETA would not be impressed !
And the swagman ends up comitting suidice. You would need to post the lifeline number at the bottom of the anthem every time it was printed.
Lets just stick with Advance Australia Fair.
weststigers
Well-known member
@balmain-boy because the division of the country by state borders is post 1788.
If the anthem represents everything he hates about Australia and colonialisation, then by default, the division of land into state boundaries is part of that. Not to mention that James Cook himself named the state after Wales in the UK.
The NSW coat of arms is a British lion and a kangaroo on a crest of the red cross of St George, the patron Saint of England. He will wear that on his chest.
The emblem does not represent the aboriginal people at all. It represents the founding of NSW by the British Empire and th offspring of that Empire.
The reasons he's stated he won't sing the anthem, apply to the crest and the name of NSW. I find that ironic.
For the record...I'm not saying he shouldn't play, nor am I saying he's not free to do what he wants. I'm just highlighting the holes in the argument and the inconsistency of the stance he has taken.
If the anthem represents everything he hates about Australia and colonialisation, then by default, the division of land into state boundaries is part of that. Not to mention that James Cook himself named the state after Wales in the UK.
The NSW coat of arms is a British lion and a kangaroo on a crest of the red cross of St George, the patron Saint of England. He will wear that on his chest.
The emblem does not represent the aboriginal people at all. It represents the founding of NSW by the British Empire and th offspring of that Empire.
The reasons he's stated he won't sing the anthem, apply to the crest and the name of NSW. I find that ironic.
For the record...I'm not saying he shouldn't play, nor am I saying he's not free to do what he wants. I'm just highlighting the holes in the argument and the inconsistency of the stance he has taken.
TheDaBoss
Well-known member
@Abraham said in [The National Anthem](/post/1017292) said:
wow,
looks like i opened a door that should stay closed, all i was saying was 'imagine' just a statement, not a suggestion
apologise if it came across like something derogratory or somthing along those lines
@weststigers said in [The National Anthem](/post/1017280) said:
You correctly state the jerseys are post-colonial borders, but I posit those post colonial borders encompass the land of their people they are probably still happy to wear the jersey, just as the Australian jersey encompasses not only the land of their tribe, but their entire people. The jerseys represent their land which is paramount to their identity. For whatever reason that's important to them they feel the anthem is not as reflective. Anyway that's all supposition on my part.
At the end of the day, history has been unkind to First Nations people. There are literal living remnants of government sponsored abduction programme. I'll not tell those people how to feel. I'll support their freedom to express themselves as they wish as they are not inciting violence or oppressing the freedom of others, in fact it's about as peaceful a statement as one could make.
@TheDaBoss said in [The National Anthem](/post/1017296) said:
Abe was having a crack at SJW's mate, not you.
weststigers
Well-known member
@Cultured_Bogan I'm not going to second guess the guy, but I would like to see what he'd answer if the question of
"why play for the jersey, but reject the anthem?"
was posed to him.
I'm just genuinely interested in the answer.
"why play for the jersey, but reject the anthem?"
was posed to him.
I'm just genuinely interested in the answer.
@weststigers that’s a fair question; of which I’d also like to take note of his answer - but I think the concept in itself and what will/may happen as a result isn’t something we need to stop.
Or be overly cautious even when having the conversation..not like he’s committing Treason
At the end of the day it’s somebody else’s life
Or be overly cautious even when having the conversation..not like he’s committing Treason
At the end of the day it’s somebody else’s life
jirskyr
Well-known member
@Abraham said in [The National Anthem](/post/1017267) said:
Yeah first verse is fine, as is the current second one from 1984, which welcomes immigrants. Obviously you can't hold a song back because of unused lyrics written 100+ years ago; in comparison, God Save The Queen used to have references to "rebellious Scots to crush" in the 1700s.
I can't speak on behalf of Indigenous folks but I assume not singing the anthem has nothing to do with the lyrics and more to do about being a symbol of white Federated Australia and the government that was forced upon them. And said government has tried, to varying degrees, to correct the wrongs that have befallen Indigenous Australians, but have not fully succeeded.
To this end, it's the same argument for Australia Day and it's hard to reach a satisfactory outcome because the modern history of Australia primarily consists of white people taking land from indigenous people. And unfortunately, that's the history of a substantial percentage of the world's nations. That cannot be taken back, only reconciled. And if you recognise those symbols, you recognise the value of the broader concept of a successful Australia, but you can also be seen to also in some way conceding to, or glossing over, the force by which that beginning was made.
In other words, the concept of Australia was originally created by the white descendants of British colonisers. Indigenous Australians were not consulted. The overall result for most Aussies has been pretty good - we are doing well as far as nations go. The overall result for Indigenous varies from good to very poor, and frankly that's true of most (all?) indigenous populations worldwide. You need to keep trying to fix that. I think it's also true that the identity of the modern Indigenous person is not the same as in 1788 and you are reconciling two different things - the ugly history of the nation and the needs of the modern Indigenous.
You lastly do need some recognition that despite the path, the outcome has been reasonably progressive. You can look at places like Germany to see how nations can take very poor routes to becoming global leaders of freedom and equality. Or how the US seems hell-bent on moving away from that ideal themselves.
The flag, Australia Day, Advance Australia Fair - all symbols to varying degrees of a British takeover, even if the anthem is actually the least particular about that fact.
And there is the problem for the anthem - it was made the national anthem in 1984. A lot of progress had been made for Indigenous Australians by then, imperfect all, but still more progressive than anything else since Federation. So if the 1984 anthem doesn't represent Aborigines, can you just add some lyrics to make that better? I doubt it.
The only resolution I see it is an overhaul of the national identity and implementation of some concept of the Uluru Statement - constitutional amendment and Makarrata Commission. A similar idea was put to Bob Hawke in 1988 and it didn't happen. To change the constitution you need a referendum and it obviously has to carry by a majority vote - it happened in 1967 to provide Indigenous rights, but most Australian referendums fail.
But you could technically do it, even if Turnbull more or less kiboshed it 2 years ago. Go to the people and ask for a mandate on adding Indigenous recognition to the constitution and set up some type of grand commission to address all the major points of Indigenous struggle. You probably need to make an election commitment to that action before you set off, otherwise you assume to be operating with unspoken the will of the Australian people.
You then make a commitment to further reform (like the Treaty of Waitangi in NZ) and you enshrine that day as the new national day / public holiday, replacing Jan 26. It's the new "looking forward only" day for all Australians.
And if you are going to the people about that, you may as well take the Republic referendum back because it's been 22 years and the Queen is getting even further on. Why not have a 4-parter where you ask Aussies to (1) recognise Indigenous in constitution, (2) move to Republic, (3) change flag (or not), (4) change anthem (or not)?
@weststigers said in [The National Anthem](/post/1017307) said:
Yeah fair enough, if he wanted to offer an explanation I'd be interested to hear his thoughts.
happy_tiger
Well-known member
In no way trying to make a comparison and I've never been to the US , do they have the same issues with American Indians and the flag , national anthem@Cultured_Bogan said in [The National Anthem](/post/1017330) said:
