 |
| Pic courtesy CAWA |
No doubt, gentle reader, you came across the reporting of shouts of abuse directed at a Welcome to Country introducing this year's Anzac Day dawn service at Melbourne's Shrine of Remembrance, and at a similar ceremony at King's Park in Perth.
It seems that there was a degree of organisation behind the Melbourne disruption, but the Perth incident was not planned.
Cries of outrage were heard from a range of sources, both directed towards the disruptions, and the place of Welcome to Country rituals at Anzac Day commemorations generally. Ex-service community social media networks lit up, again displaying strong feelings and abysmal ignorance.
The controversy highlights currents of malicious chauvinism that have simmered below the surface in this country for at least a century.
The first of these currents relates to Anzac Day. The day is simply a commemoration after all. It is not a celebration of national pride, or a glorification of the warrior class - whatever that is. The men who died are not honoured by the screams of outrage directed at the inclusion of Welcome to Country ceremonies. Their memory is demeaned by it.
Anzac Day belongs to the whole nation, and is essentially an inclusive tradition. Welcoming attendees to a dawn service is simply a manifestation of this.
The ignorance revealed by objections to all Welcome to Country ceremonies, not just those on Anzac Day, is another issue entirely. In the first place, given that indigenous Australians comprised over five hundred distinct clan groups, welcoming people to country occupied historically by that clan by an elder is an entirely authentic process.
"Country" does not refer to Australia in this context, something entirely ignored by those who mistakenly believe they are being welcomed to 2025 Australia. Various ex-service organisations made a virtue of declaring that nobody had the right to welcome them to the country they had fought for, completely forgetting that none of these clans have ever claimed to represent the whole country.
Then there are those who take offence because the elders who conduct the ceremonies are usually paid for the privilege. I find that strange, given that one of the hallmarks of a successful capitalist community is its willingness to pay for ritualistic expressions of symbolism.
It matters not whether putting money into a collection plate at a church service or paying for admission to a football match is payment for witnessing a form of social ritual, these practices are very much part of contemporary mores and have been for a long time.
Frankly, I believe that anyone who would object to a gesture of welcome has been very poorly brought up. As my mother would have said if she had been alive to witness these objections - "They need to grow up!"
