DOCSLIB.ORG

Nationalism and Human Rights This Page Intentionally Left Blank Nationalism and Human Rights

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Nationalism and Human Rights

This page intentionally left blank

Nationalism and Human Rights

InTheory and Practice in the Middle East, Central Europe, and the Asia-Pacific

Edited by Grace Cheng

NATIONALISM AND HUMAN RIGHTS Copyright © Grace Cheng, 2012.

Softcover reprint of the hardcover 1st edition 2012 978-0-230-33856-2

All rights reserved. First published in 2012 by PALGRAVE MACMILLAN® in the United States – a division of St. Martin’s Press LLC, 175 Fifth Avenue, New York, NY 10010.

Where this book is distributed in the UK, Europe and the rest of the world, this is by Palgrave Macmillan, a division of Macmillan Publishers Limited, registered in England, company number 785998, of Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire RG21 6XS.

Palgrave Macmillan is the global academic imprint of the above companies and has companies and representatives throughout the world.

Palgrave® and Macmillan® are registered trademarks in the United States, the United Kingdom, Europe and other countries.

  • ISBN 978-1-349-34157-3
  • ISBN 978-1-137-01202-9 (eBook)

DOI 10.1057/9781137012029

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Nationalism and human rights : in theory and practice in the Middle East, Central Europe, and the Asia-Pacific / edited by Grace Cheng. p. cm.

1. Human rights—Political aspects. 2. Human rights—Political aspects—Middle East. 3. Nationalism—Middle East. 4. Human rights—Political aspects—Europe, Central. 5. Nationalism—Europe, Central. 6. Human rights—Political aspects—Pacific Area. 7. Nationalism—Pacific Area. I. Cheng, Grace, 1968– JC571.N33265 2012

  • 320.54—dc23
  • 2011040451

A catalogue record of the book is available from the British Library. Design by MPS Limited, A Macmillan Company First edition: March 2012 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

Contents

  • Foreword
  • vi

Zehra F. Kabasakal Arat

1234
The Relationship between Nationalism and Human Rights: An Introduction to the Dimensions of the Debate

Grace Cheng

Human Rights as a Security Challenge: An Examination of Turkish Nationalist Discourse on Minority Rights Reforms

Beyza Ç. T e kin

All in the Name of Human Rights: A Historical Case Study on Australian Nationalism and Multiculturalism, 1980–1990

Troy Whitford

Migrants at Home: The Impact of Israeli Land Policy and Patrilocal Residence on Palestinian Women in Israel

Lilian Abou- T a bickh

1
21 47 69

  • 97
  • 5

6
National Rights, Minority Rights, and Ethnic Cleansing

Omar Dahbour

Cosmopolitan Citizenship as a Thin Concept: Who Is

  • Willing to Die for Humanity?
  • 123

Filiz Kartal

  • 7
  • The Contradictions of Human Rights and Sovereignty:

Contemporary Dilemmas of Postwar Historical Practice

Grace Cheng

141 163 179
89
Taming the Nation-State: Human Rights and Peoples

Mitch Avila

Conclusion: Nationalism versus Human Rights

Füsun Türkmen

Notes on Contributors Index
187 189

Foreword

Both human rights and nationalism make emancipatory promises, and as such they serve as effective mobilizing devices. Oppressed, repressed, and marginalized people increasingly frame their issues in human rights terms. The early uses of nationalism meant liberation, as it was connected to first peoples’ struggles against the ancien régime in the modernization of Europe and then in seeking independence from colonial and other forms of imperialism.
Moreover, the International Bill of Rights recognizes “peoples’ right to self-determination” as a human right. Peoples’ right to self-determination is often understood as a nation’s right to statehood, thus feeding the desire to form nation-states. Statehood is important because not only it equips a nation with claims of sovereignty against others, but also because the global and regional human rights regimes are essentially étatist. They recognize the state as the arbitrator as well as the provider and protector of human rights. In other words, although the post-Westphalian world structure brings forth international human rights treaties that curb states’ freedom to treat their citizens as they wish and oblige the states parties to follow international human rights norms, and “universalism of rights” means that they apply to all human beings regardless of their citizenship and other status, human rights, as constructed in these treaties, cannot be enjoyed without an active and strong state (Arat 2008). Noncitizens remain particularly vulnerable, as evident in refugee crises and treatment of immigrants.
Yet, the emancipatory function of citizenship rights has been limited, and nation-states, including those that subscribe to the rule of law and democratic governance, maintain hierarchal structures and discriminatory policies (Kaplan 1997). They engender second-class citizens, who are, in Carlos Formet’s words, “racial, ethnic, national, religious, and gendered minorities who have been driven by the discriminatory practices of their compatriots to occupy marginal positions in the ‘central institutions’ of their own homeland” (Formet 1996, 316). Moreover, nationalist discourses and mobilization efforts have been masculine and militarist, yielding nation-states that follow and reinforce patriarchal norms, structures, and

FOREWORD vii

gender roles. In postcolonial or postrevolution states, the desire to form and forge a national identity further overburden women who are treated as the carrier and transmitter of the “authentic” culture (Yuval-Davis 1997) and embodiment of the national and family honor; but at the same time they are expected to transform themselves into an image of the revolutionary/modern “new woman,” which is typically imposed by the male leadership (Durakbas¸a 1998; Kandiyoti 1987).
A blatant sign of the militarism of nationalism is the international and civil wars that have been increasing both in number and in terms of the damage and suffering that they inflict. Although when critics of nationalism, such as Arundhati Roy who notes that “nationalism of one kind or another was the cause of most of the genocide of the twentieth century” (Roy 2003, 47), emphasize the particularist, “othering” aspect of nationalism, the assimilationist, homogenizing, and civilizing missions of nationalism can be equally detrimental, if the persistent denial and excessive repression of cultural identity eradicates the culture through a “white genocide” (Tirman 1997). Assimilation policies are often problematized in assessing the impact of colonialism and Western states’ treatment of immigrants from the former colonies or in postcolonial states that are engaged in homogenizing efforts as a part of their nation-building projects. However, a quick comparison of the maps of the early-eighteenth-century and postrevolutionary France would reveal the scope of languages and ethnic/national identities lost in the process of unification and converting feudal provinces into a modern département system.
It is important to note that nationalism was also a part of the modern/
Western imperialist expansion. Different from classical imperialism that typically served dynastic interests, in which territorial expansion involved acquiring the adjacent land and making the conquered land an integral part of the empire, with its overseas acquisitions or indirect rule, modern/ Western imperialism intended to serve the interest of the “motherland.” The three pillars of Western imperialism—the state, profit-seeking entrepreneurs/corporations, and Christian missionaries—reinforced each other’s interests, even though at times they appeared to be in conflict. Most important, they worked toward homogenizing the dominated people, politically, economically, and culturally, albeit without granting them full equality. Classical empires, on the other hand, although discriminatory and exploitative, usually allowed multiple cultures to coexist and even to flourish.
Which ethnic/national groups’ right to self-determination is considered legitimate or which peoples’ demand for statehood are recognized by the community of states? I think the response to nationalist demands is largely determined by the colonial structures, as well as the power differentials

viii FOREWORD

among states.In countries where the colonial rule involved major population movements from Europe to the colonies (e.g., Americas, Oceania, South Africa), decolonization led to the establishment of states that are run by white settlers, and the colonized became “the indigenous people,” whose struggle for equality in dignity and self-determination still continues today. Indigenous peoples’ nationalist claims are often undermined, and their

cultures are essentialized. In The Elusive Promise of Indigenous Development,

Karen Engle notes that “while powerful nonindigenous entities might be able to insist on being able to ‘pick and choose’ which parts of indigenous heritage shall be valorized and preserved, indigenous communities themselves are rarely afforded such liberty” (Engle 2010, 137).
It is worth noting that beyond decolonization, only few peoples gained territorial independence and statehood during the Cold War years. Ethnic claims within both established and newly independent states were either disregarded, or they were provided accommodations that excluded statehood. However, the political map of the world changed dramatically since the end of the Cold War, and the number of states increased as each “nation” attempted to have its own nation-state. While the cause of the international community’s willingness to support more statehood claims in the aftermath of the Cold War deserves careful research, I would like to point to the irony in the proliferation of states during this recent phase of globalization, in which the global capital and neoliberal economics may be diminishing the power of state and making nation-state an element of the past.
Even independence movements that were fought in earlier times, when the state enjoyed more power, usually resulted in disappointments for the majority of the population in postcolonial states. The indignations caused by imperialism were often replaced with frustrations instigated by economic dependency and repressive rule of the “nationalist” authoritarian state. Groups that gained dominance over others established “internal colonialism.” The collective right to self-determination has been exercised by the elite, usually without an effort to consult with the majority. Personalized governance defined elite interests as national interests.
In fact, “national interests” and “national security” trump human rights in all nation-states. Powerful countries use them in devising foreign policies that undermine the rights of people living in other countries or other countries’ right to self-determination. For example, the US government’s goal to contain communism during the Cold War not only permitted granting military and economic assistance to repressive governments but also prevented many developing countries from carrying out redistributive social policies and nationalizing their natural resources and industries. Framed as “communist,” several governments that pursued progressive

FOREWORD ix

social policies that threatened the interests of US companies were toppled through CIA’s covert action (e.g., governments of Musaddiq in Iran, Árbenz in Guatemala, and Allende in Chile).
Governments may also use other nations’ nationalist aspirations to advance their own interests. On the eve of World War I, for example, as they were provoking “Arab nationalism” against the Ottoman Empire and promising independence to Arabs, the British were secretly negotiating with the French and Russians for the partitioning of the Ottomancontrolled territories among themselves. After the war, their plans were fulfilled by the League of Nations, which deemed Arabs not ready for self-rule and assigned the manufactured Arab states to the British and French as mandates and protectorates. Similarly, the current advocacy of human rights and the responsibility to protect create a milieu conducive to interventions that would serve the interests of the “intervening” parties more than the population in distress. Thus, the weaker/smaller states rebuke foreign criticisms of their human right practices and interventions by invoking “national sovereignty” arguments, and we see nationalism pitted against human rights.
Nevertheless, all states, regardless of their power and international status, summon national interests or security arguments to justify policies that restrict freedoms and compromise economic rights of many within their own borders. But, do these policies articulated under the rubric of national interests serve the interest of the entire nation or that of a particular group? Suspicious of nationalist claims, most Socialists, Feminists, and other critical analysts have considered subscribing to nationalism as false consciousness. Opposing nationalism for being divisive and militaristic, they have promoted internationalism and transnationalism.
The advocacy of human rights, with its emphasis on universalism and equality in dignity, attempts to redress the discriminatory practices and the limitations of citizenship rights. Samuel Moyn, who considers human rights “the last utopia,” contends that “[w]hether the subaltern versions of internationalism that coexisted so uneasily with anticolonialist nationalism (most obviously, pan-Arabism and pan-Africanism), or communism and attempts to save it through ‘Marxist humanism,’ it was not only the loss of faith in the nation-state but also the desertion of the state by alternative promises to transcend the nation-state that accounts for the relevance of human rights in the last three decades” (Moyn 2010, 213).
Yet, transnational claims are not always “universalist” or pro-human rights. As I was drafting this essay, Norway, normally a peaceful and calm country, was in shock and struggling to comprehend two attacks, a car bomb outside of the office of the Prime Minister and shootings at a youth camp run by the ruling Labor Party, which together claimed 76 lives.

x

FOREWORD

The person who was responsible for the attacks, Anders Behring Breivik, posted a 1,500-page manifesto entitled “2083-A European Declaration of Independence” on July 22, 2011, only hours before carrying out his planned attacks. His manifesto expresses a fear about “the extinction of the Nordic genotypes,” as well as “Islamic Imperialism,” which he thinks has been taking over Europe, as a result of Muslim migration, high birth rates among that migrant population, and the policies of multiculturalism that is promoted by the European political and intellectual elite. His strategy of expelling Muslims from Europe appears to be mass-murdering European politicians who are too lenient on Muslims. Thomas Hegghammer defines the sentiment expressed in Breivik’s writings, which is undoubtedly shared by many others across Europe, as a “macro-nationalism” that treats the European community as a “transnational entity.” Finding this akin to Al-Qaida’s transnationalism, he warns us about a new trend that justifies mass violence (Hegghammer 2011).
However, while this Norwegian-on-Norwegian violence transcends nationalism, as it sees the main conflict between a population that follow a “non-European religion” and the European community, it relies on the nation and its government to turn against the infiltrating population and restore the Europeanness of Norway. The mentality behind this violent act becomes more disturbing, if one recalls that the creation of a “supranational” European identity has been a project of the European Union and related regional organizations for some time. The mutual rise of antiimmigrant sentiments and the frustration of the alienated immigrants and their Europe-born-and-raised children pose questions about the way minority rights and multiculturalism are promoted in European countries and point to the tension between human rights and communitarian transnationalism.
As many emancipatory principles can be abused, misused, and subverted, nationalism, transnationalism, and human rights have had their shares. The sophisticated theoretical chapters and interesting case studies in Nationalism and Human Rights address the trajectory of human rights and nationalism in different settings, as well as the complicated relationship between the two concepts.
The volume is based on a conference that was held in Istanbul on June
26–28, 2008. Cosponsored by the Human Rights Research Committee of the International Political Science Association (IPSA), which I have had the privilege and pleasure of chairing since 2006, and the Human Rights Center of Istanbul Bilgi University, the three-day conference brought together over 25 participants from 10 different countries at the Dolapdere campus of Istanbul Bilgi University. The three-day conference, which was also attended by about 50 scholars, students, activists, and journalists

FOREWORD xi

allowed rigorous and thorough discussions of the different aspects of the relationship between human rights and nationalism.
Professor Grace Cheng, who had delivered an excellent and thoughtprovoking paper at the conference, later took the initiative of bringing together a set of strong and closely related papers from the conference to form a coherent volume. She also solicited additional papers to enhance and compliment the selected conference papers. Dealing with both normative and empirical questions, chapters compose a volume that is timely, comprehensive, and challenging some conventional arguments.
Professor Cheng’s introduction presents a brief yet pointed literature review that covers the major theoretical approaches and the main issues that appear at the intersection of human rights and nationalism. In the concluding essay, Professor Füsun Türkmen puts the tension between human rights and nationalism in a historical context and masterfully analyzes the contribution of each chapter on two critical dimensions of the issue: identity and sovereignty.
Given the important issues tackled and questions posed, Nationalism and Human Rights is bound to be a significant contribution to the literature in the fields of Human Rights, Political Science, Sociology, and International Relations. I would hope that it will make the students of human rights more attentive to the tension among various “right claims,” as well the “othering” that certain claims may engender, no matter how emancipatory they may appear from the claimer’s standpoint.

Zehra F. Kabasakal Arat
Chair, Human Rights Research Committee International Political Science Association

References

Arat, Zehra F. Kabasakal. 2008. “Human Rights Ideology and Dimensions of
Power: The State, Property, and Discrimination.” Human Rights Quarterly 30:4 (November): 906–932.

Durakbas¸a, Ays¸e. 1998. “Kemalism as Identity Politics in T u rkey.” In Deconstructing
Images of “The T u rkish Woman,” edited by Z. F. K. Arat, 139–157. New York:

Palgrave.

Engle, Karen. 2010. The Elusive Promise of Indigenous Development: Rights, Culture,

Strategy. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
Formet, Carlos A. 1996. “Peripheral Peoples and Narrative Identities: Arendtian

Reflections on Late Modernity.” In Democracy and Difference: Contesting the

Boundaries of the Political, edited by Seyla Benhabib, 314–330. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

xii FOREWORD

Hegghammer, Thomas. 2011. “The Rise of the Macro-Nationalists,” New Y o rk Times
(Sunday Review), July 31, p. 5.
Kandiyoti, Deniz. 1987. “Emancipated but Unliberated? Reflections on the Turkish
Case.” Feminist Studies 13:2, 317–338.
Kaplan, Gisela. 1997. “Comparative Europe: Feminism and Nationalism: The
European Case.” In Feminist Nationalism, edited by Lois A. West, 3–40. New York: Routledge.

Moyn, Samuel. 2010. The Last Utopia: Human Rights in History. Cambridge, MA:

The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
Roy, Arundhati. 2003. War Talk. Cambridge, MA: South End Press.

Tirman, John. 1997. Spoils of War: The Human Cost of America’s Arms Trade.

New York: Free Press.
Yuval-Davis, Nira. 1997. Gender and Nation. London; Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Publications.

Recommended publications
  • Australian Nationalism and Historical Memory

    Australian Nationalism and Historical Memory

    UCLA UCLA Historical Journal Title An Ambivalent Nation: Australian Nationalism and Historical Memory Permalink https://escholarship.org/uc/item/4dd790wr Journal UCLA Historical Journal, 23(1) ISSN 0276-864X Author Kelly, Matthew Kraig Publication Date 2012 Peer reviewed eScholarship.org Powered by the California Digital Library University of California An Ambivalent Nation: Australian Nationalism and Historical Memory Matthew Kelly The most important national holiday in Australia falls on April 25. Known as Anzac Day, it commemorates the Australian and New Zealander soldiers who died in battle at Gallipoli, in western Turkey, in 1915.1 Gallipoli’s central position in Australian national consciousness is not immediately comprehensible to an outside observer. Bastille Day in France or Independence Day in the United States seem sensible choices for the national holiday. In the French case, the storming of the Bastille is a suitable emblem of the transi- tion from the ancien régime to a new political order in which all Frenchmen were to be equals before the law. In the American case, the celebration of independence summons the specter of a national consciousness shaking off the last fetters of British imperial rule and so coming to full bloom. But why should a battlefield located thou- sands of miles from Australia, and from which Australians derived no material benefit, serve, in an important respect, as the geographic center of the Australian national narrative? Which overlords did the Australians overturn at Gallipoli? From whose imperial yoke did they at last work loose? The last two questions are rhetorical, of course, for neither applies to the Australian case.
  • 'Asian Australian' Migrant Identity: Brian Castro's Birds of Passage and After China

    'Asian Australian' Migrant Identity: Brian Castro's Birds of Passage and After China

    'ASIAN AUSTRALIAN' MIGRANT IDENTITY: BRIAN CASTRO'S BIRDS OF PASSAGE AND AFTER CHINA CATHY BENNETT of Passage 1982 ]BIRDS was one of the firstnovels to discussAfter theChina Asian migrant experience in Australia. It won the Australian/Vogel Literary Award for and began Brian Castro's successful writing career as a novelist. is Castro's fourth novel and most recent work. These two texts address, in part, the position of the Chinese migrant and the position of those considered 'Asian' in Australia. They also displayBirds a offasc Passageination withAft wordplayer China and with the language and debates of literary theory, features which are characteristic of all four of Castro's novels. I contend in this paper that and place the Asian Australian within the context of a global model as a postmodernindividual. I suggest that the cultural crossings frequently made in these texts, and the fact that Asian migrant characters speak in the cosmopolitan, transnational language of the postmodern, are devices which form part of an opposition to national boundaries and national restrictions. Texts which discuss the Asian migrant experienceBirds of Passage, in Australia emphasise the historical connection of the migrant with the Australian landscape and culture. This is illustrated in the double narrative technique of in which the story of a Chinese migrant's experience in the goldfields is set against that of the contemporary urban life of a young man considered 'Asian'. This double narrative has the effect of emphasisingThe Ch inaman, the length of the Chinese presenceChange inof SkiesAustralia. The device ofThe comparing Ancestor historicalGame. and contemporaryThe Ch migrantinaman, narratives within a text also occurs in Don 'o Kim's Yasmine Gooneratne'sA and Alex Miller's In Don'o Kim's the experienceA Change ofof theSkies, sensitive Japanese student Joe is paralleled by that of an earlier migrant who also experienced racism towards those considered Asian.
  • Copyright by Gregory Scott Brown 2004 the Dissertation Committee for Gregory Scott Brown Certifies That This Is the Approved Version of the Following Dissertation

    Copyright by Gregory Scott Brown 2004 the Dissertation Committee for Gregory Scott Brown Certifies That This Is the Approved Version of the Following Dissertation

    Copyright by Gregory Scott Brown 2004 The Dissertation Committee for Gregory Scott Brown Certifies that this is the approved version of the following dissertation: Coping with Long-distance Nationalism: Inter-ethnic Conflict in a Diaspora Context Committee: Gary P. Freeman, Supervisor John Higley Zoltan Barany Alan Kessler Ross Terrill Coping with Long-distance Nationalism: Inter-ethnic Conflict in a Diaspora Context by Gregory Scott Brown, B.A., M.A. Dissertation Presented to the Faculty of the Graduate School of The University of Texas at Austin in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy The University of Texas at Austin December, 2004 Dedication To Dale Acknowledgements Many people helped me finish this dissertation and deserve thanks. My advisor, Gary Freeman, provided guidance, encouragement, and a helpful prod now and again. I owe him a special debt for his generous support and patience. Special thanks are also due John Higley who provided personal and institutional support throughout the process—even when he had neither the time nor obligation to do so. I also thank the other members of my dissertation committee, Ross Terrill, Alan Kessler, and Zoltan Barany. Each of them offered sound advice and counsel during my fieldwork and the writing phase of this project. I also benefited greatly from numerous funding programs; including, the Edward A. Clark Center for Australian and New Zealand Studies, the Australian and New Zealand Studies Association of North America, and various funding sources in the Department of Government, UT-Austin. My fieldwork was also facilitated by generous support from the Australian Centre at Melbourne University and the Parliamentary Internship/Public Policy program at the Australian National University.
  • Australian Nationalist Ideological, Historical, and Legal Archive

    Australian Nationalist Ideological, Historical, and Legal Archive

    AUSTRALIAN NATIONALIST IDEOLOGICAL, HISTORICAL, AND LEGAL ARCHIVE www.alphalink.com.au/~radnat MISSION STATEMENT (as updated, August 24 2002): This Site is a document archive linked to other Australian Nationalist political and information sites. A few Australian authors are on-line. As further works are prepared for Internet publication, additional Australian authors shall appear here. This document archive shall: (i) Ground Australian Nationalism ideologically and historically; this task is related to the legitimacy of the cause as well as the discussion of its favoured political expressions and historical place and activism; providing an accurate analysis is vital in combatting the misrepresentation of Nationalist ideology and politics by its opponents in politics and the media. (ii) Answer (when appropriate) the State-liberal-political-police propaganda which attempts to delegitimize the Nationalist organizations by an assertion that they have operated, or do operate, in a criminal manner; this task shall be addressed by relevant exposé of various "legal processes" operated against Nationalist leaders and other patriotic identities in the past. This Archive shall be continually updated and maintained as a resource for the instruction of a new generation of Nationalist leaders and activists. Texts of a general relevancy to the development of Australian Nationalist ideology and politics will also be placed upon this site. This includes material drawn from the corpus of Euro-nationalist discourse. The Editors welcome that our attention is drawn to selective material. The Editors will permit some debate around the issue of ideological and political formation and shall not censor any reasonable view on any subject which advances this objective.
  • Introduction Creating White Australia: New Perspectives on Race, Whiteness and History

    Introduction Creating White Australia: New Perspectives on Race, Whiteness and History

    Introduction Creating White Australia: new perspectives on race, whiteness and history Jane Carey, Monash University Claire McLisky, University of Melbourne and University of Copenhagen As the promulgation of the White Australia Policy in 1901 would seemingly demonstrate, ‘whiteness’ was crucial to the constitution of the new Australian nation. And yet historians have paid remarkably little attention to this in their studies of Australia’s past. ‘Whiteness’, as a concept, has only recently been recognised as a significant part of the story of Australian nationalism. In seeking to understand the operations of ‘race’, historians have primarily looked towards Indigenous peoples and other ‘non-white’ groups. Creating White Australia takes a fresh approach to the questions of Australian national formation and the crucial role of race in Australian history. Including contributions from some of the leading scholars in Australian history as well as the work of emerging historians, it argues that ‘whiteness’ has been central to the racial regimes which have so profoundly shaped the development of the Australian nation. This collection is the first to draw together an array of studies dealing with the question of whiteness in Australian history as their central theme. It demonstrates that Australia’s racial past can only be understood by recognising whiteness too as ‘race’. By revealing what ‘white’ meant in a particular place and time, each of these chapters contributes to the elucidation of how race and whiteness have, in effect, ‘created’ the historical, geographical and imagined entity ix known as Australia. They show the multiple, and often contradictory, ways in which whiteness was understood, manifested, and seen, and, sometimes, how it failed to be seen.
  • A “Foreign” Country? Australia and Britain at Empire's End

    A “Foreign” Country? Australia and Britain at Empire's End

    A “Foreign” Country? Australia and Britain at Empire’s End. Greta Beale A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of B.A. (Advanced)(Hons) in History. University of Sydney October 2011 − Acknowledgements – ____________________________________________________________________________________________ I would like to firstly thank my supervisor Dr. James Curran for his patience, support and for sharing with me his incredible knowledge and passion for Australian political history. Your guidance was invaluable and much appreciated. I would also like to thank the 2011 honours coordinator, Dr. Kirsten McKenzie, for guiding me in the right direction and for her encouraging words. To the staff at Fisher Library, the National Library of Australia and the National Archives of Australia, your assistance in the research stages of the thesis was so helpful, and I thank you for going above and beyond your respective roles. To my family, I thank you for talking me through what sometimes seemed an overwhelming task. To Dad and Sasha, my calming influences, and to Mum, for her patient and precise proof reading, day trips to Canberra, and for listening with genuine interest to my ongoing discussions about the finer details of the Anglo- Australian relationship, many, many thanks. 2 - Contents - _____________________________________________________________________ Acknowledgements 2 Introduction Disentangling From Empire 4 Chapter 1 The Myth of “Civic Britannicus Sum” The United Kingdom Commonwealth Immigration Act 27 Chapter 2 “Austr-aliens” The Commonwealth Immigration Act, 1971. 49 Chapter 3 “Another tie is loosed” The transfer of responsibility for Australia House, 1972. 71 Conclusion 95 Bibliography 106 3 − Introduction − Disentangling from Empire ___________________________________________________________________________________________ In July 1973, the Australian Ambassador to the United States, James Plimsoll, received a personal letter from the retired Australian High Commissioner to the United Kingdom, Sir Alexander Downer.
  • Honouring Australians in the 1970S

    Honouring Australians in the 1970S

    The definitive version is available at http://wileyonlinelibrary.com http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ajph.12317/full The Politics of National Recognition: Honouring Australians in a Post-Imperial World1 Karen Fox and Samuel Furphy Abstract The announcement in January 2015 that Prince Philip had been chosen to receive an Australian knighthood (an honour which itself had been controversially revived the previous year) sparked a fury of debate about honours, and about the continuance of a British connection in Australia’s national life. Such debates were not new, echoing earlier arguments about honours as a national or imperial symbol. Through two related case studies – the Australian honours system and the Australian of the Year award – this article explores the politics of national recognition in 1970s and 1980s Australia. We consider both the politics involved in the creation and alteration of awards by which individual achievement and service are recognised by the nation, and the politics involved in imagining and recognising an Australian nation as expressed in those awards. We argue that these two institutions were more than a means to acknowledge hard work or sacrifice; they were also significant sites for contests over the nature of Australia’s post-imperial identity. Like most modern nations, Australia uses an official system of honours to acknowledge and celebrate the services and achievements of its citizens. This formal system is complemented by the more populist Australian of the Year award. In the twenty-first century these two honorific institutions are familiar and – with some notable exceptions – widely valued and accepted elements of the social and symbolic landscape.
  • The Distinctive Foundations of Australian Democracy

    The Distinctive Foundations of Australian Democracy

    Papers on Parliament No. 42 December 2004 The Distinctive Foundations of Australian Democracy Lectures in the Senate Occasional Lecture Series 2003–2004 Published and printed by the Department of the Senate, Parliament House, Canberra ISSN 1031-976X Published by the Department of the Senate, 2004 Papers on Parliament is edited and managed by the Research Section, Department of the Senate. Edited by Kay Walsh All inquiries should be made to: Assistant Director of Research Procedure Office Department of the Senate Parliament House CANBERRA ACT 2600 Telephone: (02) 6277 3164 ISSN 1031–976X ii Contents Alfred Deakin. A Centenary Tribute Stuart Macintyre 1 The High Court and the Parliament: Partners in Law-making, or Hostile Combatants? Michael Coper 13 Constitutional Schizophrenia Then and Now A.J. Brown 33 Eureka and the Prerogative of the People John Molony 59 John Quick: a True Founding Father of Federation Sir Ninian Stephen 71 Rules, Regulations and Red Tape: Parliamentary Scrutiny and Delegated Legislation Dennis Pearce 81 ‘The Australias are One’: John West Guiding Colonial Australia to Nationhood Patricia Fitzgerald Ratcliff 97 The Distinctiveness of Australian Democracy John Hirst 113 The Usual Suspects? ‘Civil Society’ and Senate Committees Anthony Marinac 129 Contents of previous issues of Papers on Parliament 141 List of Senate Briefs 149 To order copies of Papers on Parliament 150 iii Contributors Stuart Macintyre is Ernest Scott Professor of History and Dean of the Faculty of Arts at the University of Melbourne Michael Coper is Dean of Law and Robert Garran Professor of Law at the Australian National University. Dr A.J.
  • Shifting Australian Public Opinion on the Monarchy

    Shifting Australian Public Opinion on the Monarchy

    THE UNIVERSITY OF SYDNEY Loyal to the Crown: Shifting Australian Public Opinion on the Monarchy Prepared for delivery at the 2015 Annual Meeting of the Political Studies Association, Sheffield, March 30 – April 1 Luke J. Mansillo 10 February 2015 Over the past half century the Australian public has remained divided on the issue of whether Australia should retain the monarchy or become a republic. Clive Bean (1993) found there had been remarkable stability on the issue and evidence of a long-term trend away from support for the monarchy with a sudden decline in 1992. This article adopts Bean’s (1993) longitudinal cross- sectional methods to examine the social and political basis of public attitudes. This articles analyses the Australian Election Study (1993-2013) to compare Bean’s results and reanalyse earlier data from the National Social Science Surveys and Australian National Political Attitudes surveys (1967-1990). Public opinion has been fluid and is now at a crossroads between the 1980s high and the 1990s lows. Cohort analysis suggests socialisation impacts long term opinions. Gender and ethnic nationalism also influences opinion. It has been put ‘The survival of the monarchy in late twentieth century Britain is a socio- psychological phenomenon of strange proportions’ (Billig [1992]2002:1). If so the monarchy’s survival in twenty-first century Australia is far more outlandish. What is more peculiar is monarchy’s growing antipodean popularity. In the lead up to the 1999 referendum public opinion wilted for the monarchy (Bean 1993: 191) in spite of this the referendum failed (McAllister 2002) as voters took a least risk strategy opting to keep the Queen to one day vote for a congressional system instead of alter a parliamentary one (Davidson et al.
  • Australia and Britain at Empire's End

    Australia and Britain at Empire's End

    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Sydney eScholarship A “Foreign” Country? Australia and Britain at Empire’s End. Greta Beale A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of B.A. (Advanced)(Hons) in History. University of Sydney October 2011 − Acknowledgements – ____________________________________________________________________________________________ I would like to firstly thank my supervisor Dr. James Curran for his patience, support and for sharing with me his incredible knowledge and passion for Australian political history. Your guidance was invaluable and much appreciated. I would also like to thank the 2011 honours coordinator, Dr. Kirsten McKenzie, for guiding me in the right direction and for her encouraging words. To the staff at Fisher Library, the National Library of Australia and the National Archives of Australia, your assistance in the research stages of the thesis was so helpful, and I thank you for going above and beyond your respective roles. To my family, I thank you for talking me through what sometimes seemed an overwhelming task. To Dad and Sasha, my calming influences, and to Mum, for her patient and precise proof reading, day trips to Canberra, and for listening with genuine interest to my ongoing discussions about the finer details of the Anglo- Australian relationship, many, many thanks. 2 - Contents - _____________________________________________________________________ Acknowledgements 2 Introduction Disentangling From Empire 4 Chapter 1 The Myth of “Civic Britannicus Sum” The United Kingdom Commonwealth Immigration Act 27 Chapter 2 “Austr-aliens” The Commonwealth Immigration Act, 1971. 49 Chapter 3 “Another tie is loosed” The transfer of responsibility for Australia House, 1972.
  • Chapter Fifteen: Community Number Eight the Jews of Australia

    Chapter Fifteen: Community Number Eight the Jews of Australia

    CHAPTER FIFTEEN: COMMUNITY NUMBER EIGHT THE JEWS OF AUSTRALIA The Australian Jewish community is both sizeable and prosperous. It is rightly considered a strong community and there are those who suggest that it can serve as a model for a modern western diaspora community, balancing successful integration with a vibrant identity. Its system of day schools is considered extremely successful and it is no surprise that it has served as a magnet for tens of thousands of Jews from other communities, principally South Africa. Is this the Garden of Eden? Let's examine it. Welcome to Australia! 1. Who are the Jews of Australia? Where did they come from? How many are there? What is their geographical distribution within the country? In 1778, England took possession of Australia, previously discovered in the 16 th century and officially settled the land, despite the Aboriginal population living in the area at the time. England set up permanent structures, and created a new penal colony. In 1788, the first fleet of convicts arrived in Botany Bay in Sydney. They had been sent there in punishment for petty crimes. At least eight, and possibly even fourteen, of these convicts were Jewish. This brief overview sets the background for the birth of the Australian Jewish community, which has subsequently grown into a strong, prosperous and successful Diaspora community of the 21 st century. Led by Joseph Marcus, a former convict, Jewish practice started in Sydney in 1817 along with the formation of the Jewish Burial Society. By 1844, the country's first synagogue had been built, and this inspired many other Jewish communities to formally establish their own congregations in Melbourne, Adelaide, Brisbane and Perth.
  • Nationalism Index 1109

    Nationalism Index 1109

    ISEAS DOCUMENT DELIVERY SERVICE. No reproduction without permission of the publisher: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, 30 Heng Mui Keng Terrace, SINGAPORE 119614. FAX: (65)7756259; TEL: (65) 8702447; E-MAIL: [email protected] 356 Index m Index n A American multiculturalism 114 Abdurrahman Wahid 53, 55, 59, 66, American nation 114, 346 70 American Pledge of Allegiance 110 Aboriginal nationalism see nationalism Americanization 212 Aceh 38, 41, 54, 58, 59, 64 Amien Rais 38, 52, 53, 59 Action Committee on Indian Anderson, Benedict 17, 35, 55, 69, Education (ACIE) 85, 100 108, 109, 129, 198, 235, 237, 256, Adamic, Louis 112, 128 296, 297, 317, 350 Additional Member System (AMS) Annan, Kofi 69 244, 248 Ante Pavelic 20 Advani, L.K. 310, 312 Anwar Ibrahim 151, 160, 162 Afghanistan 306 ANZAC 178 Ainu 220, 224 APEC (Asia-Pacific Economic Co- Akali Dal 305, 308 operation) 198 Akbar Tanjung 59 Appleman, William 117 Akita Chiranki 223 Armstrong, John A. 325, 326, 341 Albania 4, 14 ASB unit trust 149 Albanian nationalism see nationalism Ashis Nandy 307 Amanah Saham Nasional (ASN) 140 “Asian tiger” economies 187 Ambon 54, 55, 56, 65 Asianizing Singapore 82, 83, 84 Ambonese 49, 50, 70 ASN unit trust scheme 140, 149 American Civil War 110 Aspaturian, Vernon V. 321 American English 115, 126 Assam 311 American hegemony 125 Astérix 214 American identity 104 Astérix Park 214 356 © 2000 Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, Singapore Index 357 AT&T 121 bilingualism 78 Atlee, Clement 246 Bishop Carlos Ximenes Belo 57 Australia xi Black, Jeremy 244 Australian