In which Casey gets a little bit political about political action
It's time for a little chat about politics. *Puts on my serious political hat (the one with the ribbons)*
Now I would like you to keep in mind that I am an International Relations student, which is really just a fancier way of saying a politics student who doesn't know how to stop at the border of the country and instead attempts to apply political theory to the anarchical international system...but that is for another time. It is also my job to explain and promote the Australian system of parliamentary democracy (although I on my own time I can do what I like) and so my views might be a little skewed because of this...but then who can ever really attempt to claim complete impartiality?
I must also state that I live in the great land of Australia, a land blessed with many things ranging from plentiful food, employment, liberal democracy, a wonderful welfare and healthcare system and egalitarian principals. I do not believe that any of these things are without fault, all of our political and social systems can and should be improved upon but it is important to acknowledge that compared to many other nations, we are very very lucky.
Today I do not necessarily wish to examine a particular viewpoint or issue, but rather to examine the ways in which people and organisations attempt to express these opinions. Please feel free to disagree with me in the comments, but if you choose to do so, please be sure to provide calm logical rationalizations for your arguments.
Ok! Now that that is out of the way...on with the show.
I don't know if anyone else has ever had the great privilege of being assaulted by 'politically minded' people trying to shove 'how to vote' cards or pamphlets into their hands. Random strangers attempt to win your support by engaging in a battle of 'who can shout the loudest.' This is also often disguised as a battle of 'who's advertising campaign is the most impressive' or 'who can make the most interesting promises'.
Today, and for the last few days, my university has been undergoing its yearly Student Association Elections and so we have been treated to a wonderful demonstration of the very actions I described above. One cannot walk through Union Court without being assulted by students dressed in brightly coloured T-shirts covered in slogans. One group has actually come up with the very interesting campaigne tactic of offering people badges that say, "Leave me alone! I've already voted for ......."
Now as annoying as this time of year is, it is a manifestation of formal (if in my opinion, somewhat unimportant) politics in action, and as such should be (albeit grudgingly) celebrated. Yet all of this fuss, coupled with my recent foray into the study of global social movements got me thinking. A dangerous pass-time, I know! :p
Social movements I am lead to believe (after three weeks of lectures and tutorials on the subject of definition) are an informal manifestation of politics which develop when the formal political system fails. This is, keep in mind, a very simplified definition. Yet one thing that has always bothered me about social movements, or more specifically the people who claim affiliation with them is the inherent laziness that seems to pervade almost all recent social movements in liberal democracies.
I am not implying that all activists are lazy, nor am I implying that the work that many people do is not worthy of attention. However I do question the motives of the average activist. The sort of person who attends a rally , waves a placard, shouts a slogan, signs a petition and then goes home congratulating themselves on a job well done. The person who is much happier taking the easy, lazy road of political action, whilst simultaneously patting themselves on the back.
Take the environmental movement for example. There are many people who are dedicated and hard-working, but there are many may more who fall into this other 'self-congratulatory lazy' category.
- How many people at an average rally, do you think, have actually researched (either formally or informally) the issue they are protesting beyond the information given to them by the rally's organizers?
- How many people have actually looked at the government, or even the opposition's positions and policies regarding the issue?
- How many people have contacted or spoken to the person who they chose less than three years prior to represent their views in Parliament, either local, state or federal?
- How many people have seriously thought about and researched the possible ramifications (be they positive or negative) of what the rally hopes to achieve?
- How many people have thought of a viable alternative to the policy that they are protesting?
At an average rally of maybe one thousand people, I would guess that only less than one hundred people (not including the organizers) would be able to even meet two of the above criteria. Less than 10 per cent (and this is a generous estimate).
I remember that when the Howard government attempted to introduce their 'Work Choices' industrial relations legislation there was an outcry from the general public. I was contacted by my union and informed that I 'must protest this heinous action being taken by the government.' I read the proposed 'Work Choices' policies (they were easily obtainable) and decided that although there were some points that I thought might be good, that overall I disagreed with the policy.
I did not consider myself particularly 'informed'. I was not a student of industrial relations and I did not have much experience in the workforce at that time, but I did consider myself informed enough to make a judgement about who to vote for in the upcoming federal election.
A few of my work-mates went to a rally organized by the unions regarding 'Work Choices' at the MCG which was attended by tens of thousands of people from all across Melbourne. Yet when I asked them why they felt so strongly about 'Work Choices' and what it was that they disagreed with so vehemently that they felt the need to protest I was told:
"I fuckin' hate it! They're just trying to rip us off, steal our conditions!"
"They're always doing this, if they put in these Work Choices, then those big corporations can fire us any time they like! I've got a family to think about!"
"Work Choices is just bad. Everyone knows it. I don't know why they think we'll fall for their lies."
When I asked if anyone had actually read the policies or done any research, however minor, regarding these proposed laws and changes, I was met with blank, disbelieving faces. Not one had read the policies. Not one.
Why then did they feel qualified to formally demonstrate?
- Had their formal political system failed them by denying them participation? No.
- Had their fully researched and rationally constructed argument been ignored by their local federal representative? No.
- Had they even READ the policy over when they supposedly felt so strongly? NO!
This sort of behaviour really annoys me!
Informal political action should only be taken when formal political pathways have been properly exhausted (although there are some exceptions). Skipping the research and essentially the hard work in favour of simply having a barbie and waving a sign is laziness. Pure and simple.
It is lazy, presumptuous, irresponsible not to mention detrimental to society and yet these self proclaimed 'activists' will be going home patting themselves on the back for having been 'politically active'.
In my humble opinion, one should aquire at least a basic understanding of a topic or issue BEFORE one forms judgement and especially BEFORE one acts upon this judgement.
But then, what do I know?
------------ ^_^ ----------------
Ok, I'll get down from my soapbox now. Sorry to rant, but today I was not only confronted by the Student Association budding politicians, but also by a number of people from my Global Social Movements tutorial as well as one individual in particular who seemed to be all in favour of shunning formal political institutions and circumventing democratic process and principals by mobilizing the working class and holding the government hostage for every and any issue, ranging from gay or aboriginal rights to climate change.
The government and democratic parliamentary system, however imperfect, is not the enemy. It is US! Holding the parliament hostage is holding the people hostage and is NOT the way to do things. Oops! I find myself on the soapbox again, I had better quit before I start to rant again! ^_^
Ok. Leave me your views on this issue. I am very interested to see what everyone else thinks and if they have experienced (or even been a part of) some of the things I have mentioned.
Goodnight!
~ Casey
Now I would like you to keep in mind that I am an International Relations student, which is really just a fancier way of saying a politics student who doesn't know how to stop at the border of the country and instead attempts to apply political theory to the anarchical international system...but that is for another time. It is also my job to explain and promote the Australian system of parliamentary democracy (although I on my own time I can do what I like) and so my views might be a little skewed because of this...but then who can ever really attempt to claim complete impartiality?
I must also state that I live in the great land of Australia, a land blessed with many things ranging from plentiful food, employment, liberal democracy, a wonderful welfare and healthcare system and egalitarian principals. I do not believe that any of these things are without fault, all of our political and social systems can and should be improved upon but it is important to acknowledge that compared to many other nations, we are very very lucky.
Today I do not necessarily wish to examine a particular viewpoint or issue, but rather to examine the ways in which people and organisations attempt to express these opinions. Please feel free to disagree with me in the comments, but if you choose to do so, please be sure to provide calm logical rationalizations for your arguments.
Ok! Now that that is out of the way...on with the show.
I don't know if anyone else has ever had the great privilege of being assaulted by 'politically minded' people trying to shove 'how to vote' cards or pamphlets into their hands. Random strangers attempt to win your support by engaging in a battle of 'who can shout the loudest.' This is also often disguised as a battle of 'who's advertising campaign is the most impressive' or 'who can make the most interesting promises'.
Today, and for the last few days, my university has been undergoing its yearly Student Association Elections and so we have been treated to a wonderful demonstration of the very actions I described above. One cannot walk through Union Court without being assulted by students dressed in brightly coloured T-shirts covered in slogans. One group has actually come up with the very interesting campaigne tactic of offering people badges that say, "Leave me alone! I've already voted for ......."
Now as annoying as this time of year is, it is a manifestation of formal (if in my opinion, somewhat unimportant) politics in action, and as such should be (albeit grudgingly) celebrated. Yet all of this fuss, coupled with my recent foray into the study of global social movements got me thinking. A dangerous pass-time, I know! :p
Social movements I am lead to believe (after three weeks of lectures and tutorials on the subject of definition) are an informal manifestation of politics which develop when the formal political system fails. This is, keep in mind, a very simplified definition. Yet one thing that has always bothered me about social movements, or more specifically the people who claim affiliation with them is the inherent laziness that seems to pervade almost all recent social movements in liberal democracies.
I am not implying that all activists are lazy, nor am I implying that the work that many people do is not worthy of attention. However I do question the motives of the average activist. The sort of person who attends a rally , waves a placard, shouts a slogan, signs a petition and then goes home congratulating themselves on a job well done. The person who is much happier taking the easy, lazy road of political action, whilst simultaneously patting themselves on the back.
Take the environmental movement for example. There are many people who are dedicated and hard-working, but there are many may more who fall into this other 'self-congratulatory lazy' category.
- How many people at an average rally, do you think, have actually researched (either formally or informally) the issue they are protesting beyond the information given to them by the rally's organizers?
- How many people have actually looked at the government, or even the opposition's positions and policies regarding the issue?
- How many people have contacted or spoken to the person who they chose less than three years prior to represent their views in Parliament, either local, state or federal?
- How many people have seriously thought about and researched the possible ramifications (be they positive or negative) of what the rally hopes to achieve?
- How many people have thought of a viable alternative to the policy that they are protesting?
At an average rally of maybe one thousand people, I would guess that only less than one hundred people (not including the organizers) would be able to even meet two of the above criteria. Less than 10 per cent (and this is a generous estimate).
I remember that when the Howard government attempted to introduce their 'Work Choices' industrial relations legislation there was an outcry from the general public. I was contacted by my union and informed that I 'must protest this heinous action being taken by the government.' I read the proposed 'Work Choices' policies (they were easily obtainable) and decided that although there were some points that I thought might be good, that overall I disagreed with the policy.
I did not consider myself particularly 'informed'. I was not a student of industrial relations and I did not have much experience in the workforce at that time, but I did consider myself informed enough to make a judgement about who to vote for in the upcoming federal election.
A few of my work-mates went to a rally organized by the unions regarding 'Work Choices' at the MCG which was attended by tens of thousands of people from all across Melbourne. Yet when I asked them why they felt so strongly about 'Work Choices' and what it was that they disagreed with so vehemently that they felt the need to protest I was told:
"I fuckin' hate it! They're just trying to rip us off, steal our conditions!"
"They're always doing this, if they put in these Work Choices, then those big corporations can fire us any time they like! I've got a family to think about!"
"Work Choices is just bad. Everyone knows it. I don't know why they think we'll fall for their lies."
When I asked if anyone had actually read the policies or done any research, however minor, regarding these proposed laws and changes, I was met with blank, disbelieving faces. Not one had read the policies. Not one.
Why then did they feel qualified to formally demonstrate?
- Had their formal political system failed them by denying them participation? No.
- Had their fully researched and rationally constructed argument been ignored by their local federal representative? No.
- Had they even READ the policy over when they supposedly felt so strongly? NO!
This sort of behaviour really annoys me!
Informal political action should only be taken when formal political pathways have been properly exhausted (although there are some exceptions). Skipping the research and essentially the hard work in favour of simply having a barbie and waving a sign is laziness. Pure and simple.
It is lazy, presumptuous, irresponsible not to mention detrimental to society and yet these self proclaimed 'activists' will be going home patting themselves on the back for having been 'politically active'.
In my humble opinion, one should aquire at least a basic understanding of a topic or issue BEFORE one forms judgement and especially BEFORE one acts upon this judgement.
But then, what do I know?
------------ ^_^ ----------------
Ok, I'll get down from my soapbox now. Sorry to rant, but today I was not only confronted by the Student Association budding politicians, but also by a number of people from my Global Social Movements tutorial as well as one individual in particular who seemed to be all in favour of shunning formal political institutions and circumventing democratic process and principals by mobilizing the working class and holding the government hostage for every and any issue, ranging from gay or aboriginal rights to climate change.
The government and democratic parliamentary system, however imperfect, is not the enemy. It is US! Holding the parliament hostage is holding the people hostage and is NOT the way to do things. Oops! I find myself on the soapbox again, I had better quit before I start to rant again! ^_^
Ok. Leave me your views on this issue. I am very interested to see what everyone else thinks and if they have experienced (or even been a part of) some of the things I have mentioned.
Goodnight!
~ Casey