THE DEBATE ON AUSTRALIAN DAY

THE DEBATE ON AUSTRALIAN DAY

Standardisation

According to “change for our future”, Australia needs a unifying national day instead of the Australia day celebrated on January 26.  This day may not be a representation of the Australian independence but rather a description of Australia’s dark history. The day represents British settlement which is irrelevant since Australia is comprised of people coming from different parts of the world. The article also reports that the day has lost its backing popularly and should therefore not be celebrated.

The article “pride in Australia” reports an entirely different point of view. According to this article, Australians should take pride in the Australian day and preserve the traditions in celebrating it. The fight for change is only noise made by minorities using media for their advantages. The main aim for the battle for reform is a little conspiracy with a completely different agenda in mind. This fight for change aims to terminate the national day entirely and not to change it has argued. Australians should, therefore, stand for what is right for Australia.

The debate on Australian Day

Every year on the 26th of January, Australians get an opportunity to express their culture and identity in what is commonly referred to as Australia Day. However, there has been heated debate on this day between two groups. One of the groups argues that the day should be changed since it does not reflect its purpose whereas the other thinks that the day is rightfully set and should be honoured with Australians being proud of it. An example is given (Macnamara, 2013) by that the Australia Day is ‘manufactured’ with public relations creates activities for the day to represent what the day does not reflect. In this paper, the main aim is on weighing the strengths and weaknesses of the arguments raised by the two groups and giving a recommendation.

Discussion

One of the arguments is that the leadership of Australia has failed in responding to the issues raised by the citizens. It seems to be a strong point taking into account that leaders are responsible for decision making in the event of democracy. Since all the citizens cannot be efficiently involved in decision making, then the issues they raise should be considered by the leaders and relevant action taken concerning the same. The seriousness with which leaders respond to the issues affecting the ones they rule either strengthens or weakens the trust placed upon them. The point, however, has a weakness in that, there is no attached evidence on any issues raised. It would be unfair to crucify leaders for not responding to issues that were not raised in the first place. Still, on the same point, there is no evidence that leaders do not respond to the issues raised. It narrows down to an individual’s effort to get the response given concerning some issues otherwise it is ignorance. In any organisation, the results of any activity must satisfy both the leaders and those not in powers. It, therefore, means that citizens are involved equally in decision making just as their leaders. (Conger, J. A., Benjamin, B., 2014)

The Australian day is said to be offensive and painful. Some citizens do not take the celebration of Britain invasion of Australia in good faith. This is viewed as a lack of recognition of the original inhabitants of the land. It makes sense when someone complains about disrespect of their forefathers. It may be true that British invasion was a sort of colonisation that could have brought with it negative impacts to the people of Australia. The idea of any colony is always to exploit other people’s resources. Colonisers always hide under the promise of civilisation and revolution to exploit their immediate subjects. It is always a painful experience since it is based on forced submission and not diplomacy. Many citizens have been fed with the information that the Australia Day reminds them of the day they were invaded by Britons and not the day they liberated themselves as should be the case. If sensitive information like this falls into the ears of desperate citizens, then their view towards could completely change. There is evidence that several Australians are viewing the day as a celebration of Nazi holocaust which was against the traditions of Australians. It is always difficult to give a reason to celebrate a day that only reminds one of their tainted past. On the contrary, however, the colonisers were not only driven by exploiting Australia’s rich climate, but at the end of the Era, a lot of development was left behind. The day could, therefore, be seen as the time when Australia realised her potential and took advantage of her colonisers. (O’Gorman E, James B, Matthew H, 2016)

The Australian day is irrelevant to Australians, and it is losing popularity among them. The argument is backed by some evidence that the day only portrays Australians to have come from the same place! The fact that cannot be ignored is that Australia is comprised of inhabitants from diverse walks of life and celebrating British invasion could make the other groups feel insignificant. Modern Australia being multicultural has every reason to view the day as being irrelevant. It is also argued that the day has lost its popularity among the citizens. Well, as much as this could be as a result of modernisation, there could be more to it than anticipated. The survey that is said to have been contacted to prove the argument cannot be taken lightly as it could well have some backing behind it. It is a matter of concern when a large percentage does not know what is celebrated during the Australia day. Again, it makes a lot of sense when the people prefer a national day that is celebrated by everyone rather than a group of individuals. A weakness arises in this, however. Will this not be a different day altogether? This argument is seen to contradict the truth that the greater percentage of Australians still raise their flags and carry them on their cars to uphold nationalism and patriotism. (Fozdar, F., Spittles, B., & Hartley, L. K., 2015)

On the other side is a group that does not support the fight for change. The group urges fellow Australians to stay strong and be proud of their tradition that is celebrated during this day. The first argument is that this fight is just based on rumours spread by noisy minorities who are taking advantage o the left-sided media. The fight could be a plot of a few individuals with the aim of undermining the national heritage of Australia. If the idea of change were as serious as these individuals want to put it, then it would be backed up with concrete evidence of any claims raised. The strength of this argument is that evidence provided comprises of figures that can be interpreted and the decision made from them. For example, the interview that is said to have been contacted shows a seventy per cent support for things to remain as they are. In any democracy, every decision making is based on numbers. This fight is seen to be a plot of professionals who have hidden agendas behind it. It is this claim that leads a majority of Australians to request these asking for the change to let Australia proceed with its agenda as it has done before. The weakness that could arise from this argument is that it will not serve the purpose of peace when the interests of the minority are ignored at the expense of the majority. It may become even more serious if the minorities have sufficient evidence to support their claims. In this context, this point needs more than just suspicion to bring it on table against those fighting for the change.

Another point of concern is that the fight is more than finding a way into the national day. The interruption on the Australian day could mean that there is no more celebration of the ANZAC day. The identity of Australia will immediately be lost because this will mean that the national flag is no longer respected. There is no nationality and patriotism in a nation that does not respect its flag. The flag is always a symbol of national unity, and when it becomes insignificant, then it is a warning sign that a nation could be collapsing. This claim is supported by the evidence that similar groups that are against the Australian Day have been seen to try changing the national flag and disrespecting the ANZAC day. The activities of the ANZAC day remind the present day Australian generation of their need of unity and how far they can take the nation and cannot be put to the test. The weakness in this argument is that the conclusion could be drawn from activities of similar groups which could not be having a similar agenda. (McCreanor, T., Wetherell, M., McConville, A., Moewaka B, H., 2015)

Those fighting for the change are interested in terminating the Australian Day for good. It is of concern that those taking the fight do not have an apparent reason to back their course. Surveys taken on radicals are seen to provide clueless suggestions about their opinions. A Suggestion like “Australia is not a republic” only means that losing the Australian Day means losing pride in Australian nationality. Therefore, Australians will no longer have a chance to celebrate their tradition and will in time forget their nationality and hence a test of unity which may not go in the right direction. Australians of good will only involve themselves in what is right for Australia. This point, however, is not backed with sufficient evidence and could easily be challenged.

Conclusion and recommendation

In conclusion, all points raised by the different groups should be treated with the seriousness they deserve. For example, it is essential to ascertain that leaders have actually responded well to claims raised by those complaining. Also, a reason should be sought as to why some citizens feel that the Australian day is offensive and painful. Those in power should make sure that proper understanding is passed to the nationals concerning the day. There is a point raised on the day being irrelevant. It will take an effort to express the relevance of this day to those affected, and if this is based on rumours, then it is wise to sensitise these people before people who have other ideas brainwash them. There is however an argument that the fight for change is only from noisy minorities. It is however not wise to go by this argument since these minorities could have some critical views. It is therefore essential for those in power to weigh the evidence provided by the minorities and make wise decisions. In addition, there could be some truth in the argument that the main aim of those fighting for change is not only to have a different national day. How valid is this point? The group giving this kind of argument should back it up with sufficient evidence to support the same. Seriousness should also be put on the argument that there is a plot to terminate the Australian Day. It is the responsibility of the authorities to find evidence from the group raising the claim and checking its reliability. There could also be some reasons as to why a particular group will be interested in terminating a national day. It requires that research should be done to check whether it is for individual’s gain or the nation’s gate. Generally, both groups have valid concerns, and it is only the evidence tabled by each group that will aid in decision making.

References

Conger, J. A., Benjamin, B. (2014). Building leaders:. How successful companies develop the next generation .

Fozdar, F., Spittles, B., & Hartley, L. K. (2015). Australia Day, flags on cars and Australian nationalism. Journal of Sociology, 51(2). 317-336.

Macnamara, J. &. (2013). The construction of Australia Day:. A study of public relations as ‘new cultural intermediaries’ , 294-314.

McCreanor, T., Wetherell, M., McConville, A., Moewaka B, H. (2015). New light; friendly soil: affective–discursive dimensions of Anzac Day commemorations in Aotearoa New Zealand. Nations and Nationalism. 300.

O’Gorman E, James B, Matthew H. (2016). Histories of climate, science, and colonization in Australia and New Zealand, 1800–1945. 100.