Monday 20 July 2015

Rallies for drowning out voices

Over the past two days rallies were held across the country by a number of groups, some of which are protesting a shift (real or imagined) in the culture of their nation, and others which are protesting their protest.

You can tell from the names of these groups which one is which, and they have been split into two sides by the media, for your easy consumption. On the 'right', Reclaim Australia and the United Patriots Front. On the 'left', Rally Against Racism and United Against Islamophobia, supported by socialist and university groups.

I would love to be able to pronounce judgement in some form or another on which of these groups had a valid point. Unfortunately, I cannot. The media coverage of these events has been completely lacking in any form of substance, focusing almost entirely on 'clashes' with basically all of the pictures taken involving either people bellowing at others and/or policemen looking stern.

The problem with focusing on these basically irrelevant incidents is that it entirely takes away from the point of these rallies. Or, at least, the point of the Reclaim Australia rallies. It's quite remarkable how the ABC in particular managed to quote the counter-protesters far more than the initial ralliers, to the point where what the rallies were about was lost amongst the cries of racism and hate speech and the like.

From what I can gather, though, I find the claims of the counter-protesters somewhat dubious.

Reclaim Australia and other like-minded groups can fall into one of two categories: nationalists, or fascists. The best place to look to find which they may be is Europe, which is well ahead of us in terms of national discontent about immigration.

There are a large group of parties that are regularly dismissed at far-right, racist, fascist, violent, hateful etc. Some of these parties are, some of them are not, some of them might be but have conflicting messages. For example, the United Kingdom Independence Party (UKIP) is clearly not a racist party. It has repeatedly stated that immigration is fine, but mass immigration and a lack of border control is not. Golden Dawn, the third largest party in the Greek parliament, clearly is a racist party, and though it rejects the label of Nazism it is happy to display very similar elements to the Nazis, from its logo to its rallies to its beliefs. France's National Front probably isn't, but the legacy of its former (now outcast) leader Jean-Marie Le Pen has all but guaranteed that the connection between the party and anti-Semitism will stick for years to come. Hungary's Jobbik possibly is, and undoubtedly has elements within its party that are, but at the very least seems fairly happy to let such elements support them without giving them support back.

Despite the great difference between these parties (and the fact that they all disagree with each other in the European Parliament) all have been denounced with the same language domestically and internationally. Is this wise? It seems to me that if you denounce a party and its supporters as racists, when they are not and their policies suggest otherwise, all you do is fuel tensions, and further their anger at the political climate of their nation. Take it far enough, and it could well become a self-fulfilling prophecy, though it seems unlikely to happen here.

Should Australia's economy tank (it will), chances are there will be far more community discontent and, therefore, many more people joining in rallies like that of Reclaim Australia. Right now, these rallies don't need a great deal of attention, but the public needs to be informed about them properly, to ensure that there is an understanding across the community of the genuine will of the people. If discontent rises, it cannot continually be dismissed as far-right fantasy. For now, let us observe what happens, and if we will indeed follow the Europeans with genuine concerns over immigration, or whether we will instead go our own way. Whatever we do, let us not dismiss today's events, and what they could mean for the future.

2 comments:

  1. Golden Dawn became very popular among young male voters during Greece's financial crisis. I think we look at these European examples and think "it will never happen here" but I'm not so convinced.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. One thing that we have in our favour is that we have no real history of such movements. Golden Dawn has its roots stretching as far back as the military junta of the 60s and 70s. Even though the organisation itself has had a fairly small membership for most of its history, it's still been there, able to establish some sense of legitimacy for itself over the years. They're still a minority in Greece, but if Syriza falls thanks to the egos within the EU, Golden Dawn will be the recipient of many, many protest votes.

      Delete