Momentous Events

When world-changing events happen, most people can remember where they were at the time.

My father woke me one morning in November 1963 to tell me that Jack Kennedy had been assassinated. I was sixteen, and as the oldest was relegated to sleeping on a verandah, as the school residence wasn't large enough for a family of six.

Dad emerged from inside the house with an expression of great distress on his face. He had been transfixed by the notion that a Catholic had been elected President in 1960, and now was devastated by his assassination.

Martin Luther King was shot on my younger brother's birthday, and by some strange twist of destiny, Bobby Kennedy died on my 21^st Birthday the same year.

I was dismayed by this, as I'd held out hope that the younger Kennedy would win the Presidency, and withdraw from Vietnam before I was enlisted in the Army. I had been conscripted, and was teaching out my first year (as was the agreement) prior to call up. I believed, rightly or wrongly, that if the Yanks left Vietnam, we would follow. It was particularly ironic from my perspective that this indeed happened, but not before I had spent a year in Vietnam in 1970.

This consciousness that momentous events on the other side of the Pacific have a direct and profound effect on our lives in this country has never left me.

On 11^th September 2001 (my youngest daughter's birthday) I watched the twin towers come down, with a deep sense of dread about the impact this would have on politics in this country. Few would argue the events of that day failed to shape the outcome of the next two federal elections.

Yesterday I was driving back from to Toowoomba after work in Roma, Wandoan, and Taroom. It's a long trip, and I tuned into the hourly news broadcasts that brought Obama closer to the Whitehouse as I got steadily closer to home.

The unfolding countryside paralleled my unfolding realization that nothing would ever be the same again. By Wallumbilla the networks were beginning to make cautious predictions, and by Yuleba, there seemed little doubt. I turned the radio off at Miles before pausing to have a coffee, with McCain's graceful concession in my ears.

At home last night, Obama's acceptance speech was riveting. I've emailed copies to my kids urging them to watch it, because the event will have a strong effect on their futures. Maybe they will – maybe not, but I hope someday they will develop an understanding of the broad sweep of history leading to this moment.

Hopefully, they won't have to wait to become old and cranky like their father before they understand.

Lukas

From today's Weekend Australian –

(Pic courtesy of The Age).

The Rudd .Government is under pressure from all fronts, even Labor colleagues, to overturn a decision denying German doctor Bernhard Moeller permanent residency in Aus­tralia because his son Lukas has Down syndrome. The Immigration Department this week rejected Dr Moeller's application for permanent residency, saying the potential cost to the taxpayer of 13-year-old Lukas's condition was too great. Politicians, disability groups and the small Victorian town of Horsham, where Dr Moeller is the only specialist physician, were outraged by the deci­sion and have called on Immigration Minister Chris Evans to intervene on the family's behalf.

This situation would seem to put our federal government at odds with its own anti-discrimination legislation. The cold reality of this decision is that it puts a diminished value on the life a child with a disability.

Having spent the best part of forty years working with this particular group, it makes me wonder whether the people who developed our current immigration policy have been living on another planet. Apart from the doubtful assumption that this child's life will impose a burden on the community (measured by whom and how – I wonder*) it ventures into entirely dodgy territory by attempting to put a value on human potential.

I wonder how it is possible to predict the future contribution of any able-bodied child immigrant. It's entirely conceivable that an immigrant child could grow up to become a criminal and cost the community a fortune. Are potential child immigrants profiled? If they aren't and children with disabilities are, doesn't this say something about our national values?

Kids with Down syndrome, unless there is some other factor involved, are not, in my experience, a future burden. A very large proportion become independent contributing members of society. I don't believe too many go on to a life of crime, costing the community a fortune in custodial situations.

If we were to forget the economic rationalist view of the world for a moment, and apply a humanist (dare I say Christian) perspective, this policy looks completely out of step. I'd like to think we live in a country that welcomes and seeks to include all potential citizens, providing that they wish to contribute to the future of the nation to the best of their ability. This potential should not be referenced to race, creed, or disability.

*"Not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that counts can be counted" - Albert Einstein

Snipped by Bolt

I often post to Andrew Bolt's bolt – the results provide some light relief. From time to time I get snipped by his moderators. It usually happens when I criticize his bias or style. This post contains an example. Make up your own mind as to whether this constitutes abuse. (Unfortunately, I didn't save the original post – but it's pretty close).

The snip –

Andrew
No matter what the topic, you always SNIP......abuse of the host. If you loathe the host so much, why on earth are you here? Please learn to debate like and* adult or go play somewhere else. Bolt Moderators.

* Note the spelling - they must have been in a hurry....

This was more or less what I posted –

Andrew

No matter what the topic, you always find a way to bash the agencies. Child abuse and neglect has nothing to do with ideology. It may have something to do with a materialism where children are seen as accessories.

Your erudite post which reports an anecdote to revive the cliché about PC will really improve the quality of life of children in care!

Can I suggest you do some research and develop an opinion from the data rather than the other way around? You might be surprised at the result.

Trouble is, this kind of analysis is not characteristic of the kind of post that pleases the ratbag right.

Try - http://www.aic.gov.au/publications/tandi/tandi146.html

Update -

This too was snipped -

Andrew Bolt railing about bias is like Mae West complaining about innuendo.

I thought it was funny......

Update 2 -

This wasn't snipped - just not posted - in response to -

http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/modestly_dressed/

What gratuitous claptrap! Why not comment on the thousands of teachers who don't abuse students, or the thousands of Muslims who wear hijab because they have genuine faith? Bigots thrive on the sentiments exhibited by this.

Apparently Mr Bolt has a thin skin.

Inspiration

It's been an interesting week. I spent Monday to Friday traveling around my largest circuit which took me 700 km west. The work is largely about supporting students with physical impairments, and some of it involves visiting the families where these children live, particularly when they're very small, so that plans can be set in motion to make whatever adjustments are necessary to allow their access to school. I've covered over 2500km this week.

Because it's Queensland, the schools are almost universally built on stumps, accessed by stairways. This is a problem for kids in wheelchairs. One of my jobs is to write access audits for the principals so that they have the information they need to plan for these students. Often, because of financial planning issues, the reports need to be available many years before enrollment. So I try to make an assessment of the student-to-be well in advance of actual enrollment, and often the children are as young as three.

On Thursday, I visited the home of a three year old girl with an undiagnosed condition. She is a beautiful child, but requires around the clock care. She is tube-fed, and still doesn't sleep through the night. She is delightfully responsive, mostly cheerful and loved dearly by her mum and dad who live on a very remote cattle and sheep property accessed by a road that is impassable after a few showers of rain.

Her mother has done a fantastic job in setting up learning programs for her, ably assisted by a visiting support teacher who spends a few hours with her every week. It takes about two hours to get to the property from the nearest town, and the nearest (very small) school is about an hour's drive to the south.

There is support from health and disability agencies, but the support teacher is the only professional who actually visits her home. To access therapy (very important for this child), the mother has to take her to a health clinic. Routinely, she has to travel the 600km to Brisbane to access the range of specialist services necessary.

This is by no means an unusual situation. The devotion and sheer grit demonstrated by her parents in ensuring she lives the best quality of life possible is inspirational, but not unusual in rural communities. Her mother simply hasn't had a break in three years, since her little girl was born. She dismisses this with a philosophical shrug – for her it just isn't an issue.

On the day I was there, her dad was out meulsing, but he came in for lunch, and after a quick cleanup (meulsing is a messy activity), he and his two brothers sat down with his wife and the visitors (the support teacher and I) to have lunch. There ensued a lively conversation, and one of the issues discussed was executive remuneration. Given that lack of public funding is often given as a rationale for lack of services in the bush, it occurred, as a passing thought, how much difference the injection of some private money might make to this situation. The parents could, for example, get some respite. They could also employ someone to run a stimulation programme with this little girl so that she might develop some language skills. She's certainly showing some strong pre-communicative behaviours.

I wonder if any of the Masters of the Universe receiving packages in excess of say, 10 million per annum, spare a thought for people in these situations? I wonder whether there is any angst associated with these obscene amounts?

I guess not – Australian Execs aren't noted for philanthropy.

In any case, I find the selfless love demonstrated by these families inspirational, and you can't put a price on that.

Review of 1942

This week's review is 1942 by Bob Wurth.

I have always been fascinated by this period of our history. This probably developed from my childhood in North Queensland, and my dad's occasional stories about his time in the RAAF in New Guinea. Listening to him, it was abundantly clear to me that many Australians genuinely feared a Japanese invasion, and living in the area which at that time was considered to be under great threat also focused my interest.

There has been historical disagreement about whether an invasion of this country was intended at the time. I won't spoil any reading of 1942 for you, except to say that different elements of the Japanese military hierarchy held different ideas about invasion.

The other contending views about this dangerous time relate to the role of the Americans.

Wurth's view of this is interesting in that he describes a strong personal relationship between Macarthur and Curtin which he concludes influenced American tactics at the time. He takes a different and refreshing look at American motives, exposes some disagreement between the military and political arms of the US administration, and sees Macarthur as an ally for Curtin in his disagreements with Churchill.

This is rivetting stuff, and some of it is bound to send some of the more extreme right-wing interpreters into meltdown. Wurth's conclusion about war in general, and Japanese suffering, in particular, will raise hackles –

Japan's war cost the lives of 17501 Australians and millions of others. How many more, though, had the brash captains and the bellicose admirals of the Inland Sea had their irrational way?

Of all the foibles, war is the worst, equaled only by ignorance and disinclination to discover the truth of it.

"I'm fed up to the ears with old men dreaming up wars for young men to die in."

George McGovern.

After the rage generated by my review of Paul Ham's article, it appears my lack of condescension to the reigning historical orthodoxy has already caused deep offence.

Wurth's research gives the story life and authenticity. It also reveals that very strong opinions and old grudges are still held in Japan over the course of events. He spent a lot of time in and around the Hashirajima anchorage, where the great ships of the Japanese fleet found refuge, and thoroughly analyzed Senshi Sosho, the Japanese official war history series on the Pacific campaign.

The book is available in soft cover at good newsagents. It's a great way to spend $34.

I'll be travelling with work this week (Roma, Morven, Charleville, Quilpie, Cunnamulla and Eulo), so will be at the mercy of Nomadnet to respond to comment, but I'll do my best.

Reviewing "Paul Ham on War"

It's time for another review – this one is looking at an article in the Weekend Australian Magazine of October 4 – 5, 2008.

I'm a fan of Ham's, having read both "Vietnam, the Australian War" and "Kokoda ". I like his work because it is a combination of thoroughly researched and objective material, with reflections based on the experience of soldiers. He lays out context with an attention to detail unsurpassed in anything else I've read. His reflections are never mawkish, but cut like a knife through the jingoism and faux nationalism which is unfortunately a feature of literature about war and conflict.

This article is no exception. I read it as a rationalization of his approach to the subject. He talks about the total impact of military conflict on all involved, and widens the perspective of the reader beyond the conventional guts and glory narrative we're used to. There is also a clear message about the relationship between the soldier and the politicians and the nation who send them off to fight. He makes a very clear and simple conclusion that resonates with my experience –

Australians' newfound enthusiasm for our martial past often fails to consider the dreadful context of a soldier's self-sacrifice, and cleanses the act in a mawkish celebration of civilian conceptions of war as "good triumphing over evil", or "fighting to defend the realm, king and country". Most soldiers scorn these interpretations: "We were fighting for our lives and the lives of our mates" seems to be the most common thread that binds men in battle.

He makes particular reference to Vietnam, and makes a strong point that connects it to Iraq and Afghanistan –

Nor is it useful to see the Vietnam War as a mere setback in the Cold War. As one Australian academic stated: "It is easier now to think of Vietnam not as a war that was lost but as a losing battle within a bigger Cold War struggle that was won." It maybe easy; it is also simplistic and dangerous, as it portrays this unique human tragedy as the forgettable ephemera in an otherwise triumphant Western victory, and tends to absolve the grave political mistakes that led to it. In consequence, the soldiers' self-sacrifice is diminished, and the Vietnam War ceases to be a singular human catastrophe from which we might learn. At least our involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan appears to have taught us not to attack soldiers for politicians' decisions. If we're honest, only by knowing why Australian soldiers went to war, the context of their battle honours, and their failings as well as their triumphs, can we fully appreciate the true nature of sacrifice in war.

I'd recommend it strongly. Get hold of the magazine, or find it in the library. If you haven't read any of his other works, do yourself a favour and do so.

I've also posted the illustration by Danny Snell. I hope no copyright has been breached!

Daylight Raving

It's that time again. We're hearing the usual bleating from the white-shoe brigade about the misery they're enduring because Queensland hasn't embraced daylight saving.

I can remember the last time Queensland flirted with the notion. At the time I was living and working in Mount Isa. I won't ever forget the sight of people going for "evening" walks with hats and sunscreen, or dragging the kids out of bed in the pitch dark. It was not a popular notion in a city due North of Adelaide with Summer temperatures in the forties.

Part of the problem, is the idea that the time difference is a North-South issue. It isn't – it is only meaningful in the East-West context, and this is the problem for Queensland. It makes as much sense for our far Western centres to be on South Australian Time as it does for them to be on Daylight Saving Time.

The disregard of our state's geography is common in inhabitants of the South East corner. It should be a legislated requirement for the air-conditioned boardrooms in Brisbane and the Gold Coast to have a map on the wall.

In the meantime – let the masters of the universe get up an hour earlier, and knock off an hour earlier. In the tropics and sub-tropics, the idea is a nonsense.