Why Does Pauline Hanson Use Language To Divide Australian Society

Language use in Australia constantly and rapidly changes to reflect the ever-evolving Australian national identity. It is being influenced by American culture, through its pervasive media, and altered to create a unique identity that addresses the needs of the younger Australians. Technology, the loss and gain of expressions, changing perception of taboo words and political correctness also attribute to the way that language has evolved to fabricate our national identity.

In a world surrounded by media, people are reliant on truthful and honest information to form accurate conceptions of current events and issues. Australia is a self-proclaimed multicultural country who aims to achieve equality and equity. However, through the analysis of the comparative text between, Stan Grant’s ‘The Australian Dream’ and Pauline Hanson’s, “Maiden Speech” it is clear that the truth is juxtaposed with the reality of the present Australia, who is still a country with racism and inequality. Despite two people stating the arguing issue, there are different perceptions of truth of who is the most vulnerable. In which Grant places great significance on the racism rooted in the Australian Dream and Hanson’s stance for non-Indigenous people inequality.

Stan Grant’s speech ‘Racism and the Australian Dream’ (2015) effectively reminds the Australian population of the racism and harsh inequalities indigenous Australians have faced in the past and still face today. In reminding us of this reality, Grant engages us to discover issues of civic participation in Aboriginal people and in doing so perpetuates a need for social change. More?

The assimilation program and federal law just caused mass amounts of problems not just now but for future generations to come. Many members of the Stolen Generation have a sense of loneliness, low self-esteem, loss of identity and mistrusting everyone and have also shown a much higher unemployment rate causing economic problems. The Stolen generation also has had an impact on Parliament as seen in the famous “I’m Sorry” speech by Kevin Rudd in 2007 and more recent apologies to the “White Stolen Generation”. The Stolen Generation has impacted Aboriginal Australian life drastically and Australian’s history and is often portrayed in the media and in movies such as Rabbit Proof Fence.

The Australian Citizenship Legislation Amendment, Strengthening the Requirements for Australian Citizenship and Other Measures Bill 2017, introduced by Mr Peter Dutton, minister for Immigration and Border Protection proposed to reform the requirements of citizenship. The bill incorporates a number of integrity measures to ensure migrants are capable of upholding Australian values and subsequently, prepared to be full, active members in Australian society. To maintain social cohesion and facilitate social progression, the bill suggests stricter application requirements, fundamental to determine whether an individual acquires Australian values measured through new imposed testing. Currently, Australia is a combination of diverse cultures, religions and consequently, it is considerably difficult to define the values of Australian citizens as a whole. Therefore, the underlying motives of the Australian Citizenship Bill 2017 are highly controversial.

Kevin Rudd’s apology was to the Aboriginals; but in particular, to the Stolen Generations. From 1909-1969, the Australian Government forced a policy know as assimilation upon the Aboriginals. Assimilation is the forced integration of minority groups onto the dominant society. Inhumane acts were inflicted upon these proud people because of the ‘Aborigines Protection Board’ which entailed that the Australian Government had full rights to forcibly remove half-caste children from Aboriginal care without parental consent nor a court order.

Present day Australia is met with the issue of outlining a sense of a nationwide community, after the breakdown of the British race patriot idea in the mid-1960s with the introduction of multiculturalism. The Euro-centric perception of Australia was annulled and it was incapable in playing a significant part in Australian policies and priorities. It triggered a calamity of national identity and meaning. The credence that Australian’s were apart of Britain, united by history, tradition and blood needed to be revised. A people who had recognized themselves so strongly with the British race now had to accede their race awareness and apprehend the notion of being a now multicultural society. The dawn of multiculturalism also provoked a quandary for balancing a respect of the British heritage with the abating relevance of the British connection and to construct a new language of community from the residues of the old British ways.

The referendum campaign effectively focused public attention on the fact that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians were second class citizens with all sorts of limitations - legislative and social - on their lives. This decade-long campaign to change the Constitution came to symbolise the broader struggle for justice being fought during these years. Activists presented the case for a Commonwealth government

This article gives the reader an inequitable view of Indigenous Australians, defending Tony Abbot’s point of view and the audience is encouraged to agree with mainstream media in regards to whether or not Tony Abbott is racist. Article B from the Koori Mail condemns Tony Abbott’s viewpoint as not only racist but he is insulting the very culture that he is representing. Article B states that Tony Abbott does not understand Indigenous culture and how important land is to them “Connection to country is everything to Aboriginal people – defines Aboriginal people and sustains us in a cultural and spiritual sense and can play a vital role in building economic independence, self-determination and healing” (Greg Cromelin, Article B). With Article B the audience is encouraged to get angry at Tony Abbott’s comments and make him out to be racist.

Following Australian Immigration Minister Peter Dutton’s comments on the ‘danger’ of ‘uneducated and illiterate’ refugees and immigrants being accepted into Australia, debate resurfaced regarding the issue of asylum seekers and immigrants in general, and whether refugees deserved to be resettled in Australia. In an opinion piece for The Age newspaper, Kon Karapanagiotidis argues that Peter Dutton’s claims are false and that on the contrary, refugees and immigrants have much to contribute to Australian society. His arguments are fashioned in a heavily emotive tone, and overall the piece is compelling and compassionate while also heatedly opposing Dutton’s views.

The greens senators stood in solidarity with the Muslim community and walked out halfway through the speech (Meers, 2015). Greens leader Richard Di Natale, tweeted, “racism has no place in parliament but that is what we have just heard from Senator Hanson. I stand with those people hurt by her words” (Meers, 2015). On the contrary, ex-prime minister John Howard called on the Australian public to not to demonise Hanson. Interestingly, both reactions cannot equate to the significance of the reaction that came from the Muslim community. Whilst many were disenchanted by Hanson’s ignorant and unwitting affirmations, the majority took a strong stance on social media, predominately twitter- tweeting the contributions they have given to Australian society. Muslim outrage in the face of racism may provoke their tendency to participate in Australia’s civic life, with the intention to break stereotypes and invigorate their reputation in mainstream

64, Commonwealth of Australia 2011). Policy then moved towards more assimilationist strategies in which attempts were made to convert Aboriginal Australians into ‘responsible citizens’ (Gilbert 2005, Haebich 2000). The protectionist and assimilationist policies share the core values that Aboriginal culture is inferior and on its way to an ‘evolutionary end’ (Gilbert 2005, p. 64).

6). The Diversity and Equity policy (DET 2013) was created to respond to the growingly diverse Victorian Community. Many Victorians face issues of racism and bullying and due to cultural and religious backgrounds, as well as socio-economic status, many do not experience equal or equitable opportunities. This is due to the emergence of our society as neo-liberal. Neo-liberalism means that ‘the agenda of economic and social transformation’ (Connell, 2013, p. 99) has moved from public agencies to ‘companies selling services in a market.’ A society modelled under neo-liberalism is skewed to support those with money and privilege, a majority of which, in Australian society, are middle class Anglo-Australians. As a result, the issues of equity and diversity within a neo-liberal society leave those affected at a marked disadvantage in comparison to the majority of Australians. The Diversity and Equity policy (DET 2013) is an attempt to improve the disadvantage experienced by the

Australia is a settler nation which is now made up of many ethnic groups who share similar cultural traditions, common language, shared history and a shared identity (ABS, 2016). These groups contribute to what is referred to multiculturalism. Australia has a higher proportion of people born overseas than the US, Canada and the UK, with 49% of Australia’s population (or a parent) being born overseas (Census of Population and Housing, 2016). Compared to other Western nations, Australia has one of the most diverse immigration populations (Collins, 2013, p. 145). The meaning of multiculturalism in Australia has changed significantly over time. Today, Australia is a culturally and ethnically diverse country and therefore is a multicultural society. In terms of public policy, multiculturalism can be defined as policies and practices implemented by the Australian government that aim to manage cultural diversity to benefit the whole of society (Department of Social Services, 2014). Although Australia is a multicultural society, there are criticisms of public policy surrounding multiculturalism.

While there is little doubt that overall multiculturalism is convenient for Australia, there are a few disadvantages resulting from this policy such as the perpetual increase of racist tendencies amongst the population. This is due to a lack of anti-racism plans of