A Day of Protest

Walking through the city centre and heading towards one of the parks, it took a moment to realise that the many police officers we saw riding bikes and motorcycles were going to the same place we were. This dawning of realisation was the beginning of the frisson of adrenalin that begins coursing through your system as you head towards the rallying point of a civic protest against the actions of your nation state. Though permits and permissions had all been organised by the rally organisers, rallies and civic protest always carry a slight edge to them as multiple individuals become part of a cohesive collective expressing a singular intent. With the amount of families present at the rally and with the admirable manner in which the organisers controlled the event, the rally was never going to be anything other than peaceful but a large gathering of concerned civilians and citizens in any city centre is always a worry for authorities and a reminder to us of the visual and symbolic power of protest.

Symbols of Protest. Photo credit: HammieRiffs

As we peeled off the main road and headed towards the park, weekend shoppers and protesters began to distinguish themselves. Those going to the rally walked more purposefully as we got nearer to our rally point and with definitive intent, stepped over the low curb of the boundary that marked the park and in an instant we became politically active and identifiable. 

Mercifully the organisers had set up the stage near the shade of the trees so we were able to shelter from the biting early summer Australian sun. The opening of the rally was ushered in by First Nations people affirming their solidarity with the oppression of the Palestinian people and the importance of what land is for the expression of culture for both themselves and for the Palestinians. As the dancers began the welcome ceremony to their ancestors and didgeridoos played, the wind eerily began to pick up again and shake the leaves of nearby trees with a surprising intensity. As this occurred the speaker announced that the wind was representative of their ancestors coming to give protection and blessing to the gathering. A shiver went down my spine. This oddly enough has not been the first time I have experienced this. A very similar phenomenon happened at a previous ceremony I witnessed.

The rest of the rally was taken up by speeches and artistic pieces performed by various local artists along with announcements for fundraisers. Sitting nearby on the grass was a family group with a happy, charismatic little baby boy who was seemingly fascinated by two young women sitting ahead of me who looked like his mother but were not wearing hijabs. He was amazed by their faces and hair and seeking to impress them, on multiple occasions, with a wobbling determination, he used his chubby little hands and arms to haul himself up unsteadily onto his feet using his stroller for leverage. Upon doing so, he would turn pointedly to the two young women and smile broadly and proudly at them. 

They responded to his big, gummy grins with smiles of their own. He was being so cute and with a sudden rush in my heart I unexpectedly felt the horror of what was happening in Gaza. So many babies and small children such as himself had been rendered homeless, had lost their entire families, were going thirsty, were being bombed and being starved out in Gaza and my government, my own government were using our ports, our military weapons and our satellite facilities to aid and abet these crimes against humanity. It was a moment of humanisation. The atrocities being committed in Gaza was not just something I was witnessing on the television but was now suddenly and emotionally being embodied and represented by a very sweet and innocent child sitting on the grass in the speckled shade in front of me. Though not wanting to cry, I nonetheless put my head down and swiped at the tears that fell. 

Time to March. Photo credit: HammieRiffs

Soon it was time to march. Bringing up the rear, I took B’s caution of not getting caught up in the middle of the rally where the loudness and ferocity of the chanting on loudspeakers will surely clip a few decibels off your long term hearing. With our accommodating police escorts, we ambled down the entertainment drag of our city. Shoppers and those seated at pubs, eateries and cafes watched us as if we might have been part of the day’s local entertainment, a curiosity of the city to observe. At the end of the march we congenitally lingered together as a group and chanted a little more before dispersing. It was getting late and everyone needed to get home to start the working week. 

Wearing no overt symbols of protest or comradeship such as keffiyehs nor carrying any protest signage, it was easy for B and I to meld back into the rapidly dwindling crowd of city day trippers after the protest finished for the day. We joined the great exodus of people emptying out of the city as the vast majority of us boarded the trains and buses that would ferry us back to suburbia. As we left those who are largely forgotten and marginalised, the homeless, the mentally ill and the addicted, moved in the emptying spaces of the city. The negative space that is societal abandonment and indifference to their plight is regrettably the place where they largely exist. It is an isolating and unkind space that we can largely ignore by fleeing to our homes in the suburbs. Observing the homeless and the marginalised occupy public space more dominantly once the hustle and bustle of commerce recedes, it's hard not to surmise that the bar we sometimes set for ourselves as a society can be quite low.

Sitting in front of my dinner that night I felt both energised and desultory. It felt like we hadn’t accomplished anything but we had also accomplished something. Our protest action today didn’t change or alter a single thing in Gaza but by being a warm body to count at the rally still meant something I feel. It largely means support, to show Gazans suffering unspeakable horrors that are in part being facilitated by our own governments and tax dollars, that we know they are suffering, we are bearing witness to what is being done to them and for what it matters, that they are not facing this entirely alone. It’s also a sharp reminder to our political leadership that we protest what they do. In a democracy, all of this matters. It’s what helps to keep our system not just liberally inclined but somewhat democratic as well. 

The realpolitik of this world along with the maintenance of the current system and its accompanying ideological framework will most likely mean that might not right will determine when this conflict and the suffering endured by Gazans will end. By that stage I would think that the civilian death toll in Gaza will be quite unimaginable and it will be a mark forever against the West and rightly so. The West has undone so much of the good that it thinks itself to stand for by allowing Israel to collectively punish Palestinians for the crimes of Hamas. The Emperor has no clothes and the protest continues. 

What Do We Stand For When We Stand Aside: Gaza and Liberalism

Israel has the right to respond to an attack on its citizens and state but the scale and proportion of that response matters. Similarly, Palestine has the right to resist occupation but again, how that resistance is expressed also matters.

In some respects, we in the West have been a bad ally to Israel for not holding it to greater account prior to Hamas’ brutal and shocking attack on October 7. Israel’s method of dealing with the claims and actions of Palestinian nationalists and ultra-nationalists has been to enforce an apartheid style occupation of Palestinian territories, thereby creating the asymmetrical conditions that terrorism often thrives in. The West tacitly supported the transformation of Gaza into what amounts to an open air prison. Under these conditions, Palestinians living in Gaza were largely unable to obtain gainful employment and were mostly nourished and sustained via a thin and perilous system of international aid delivered by trucks through checkpoints. Furthermore, although not happy with the expansion of Jewish settlements in the West Bank, our political leaders in the West have over the years, mostly turned a blind eye to it. 

Had the West demonstrated to Israel that we as its allies supported a true two state solution, perhaps Israel might not have so readily enacted the collective punishment of the Palestinian people as being a suitable response to the October 7 Hamas attack. Israel’s fear of possible sanctions, the potential denial of military aid and the threat of diplomatic isolation might have restrained its hand in those understandably furious moments in the aftermath of October 7 had it known that it would have been sanctioned by its allies if its response contravened international law. But Israel knew no such actions from its allies were in the wings, it knew it could respond with something akin to genocidal intent if it so wished. When you enforce and subject people to apartheid style conditions for a long duration of time, it’s easier to dehumanise them and from there, the road to potential genocide by your nation state as a response to the inevitable resistance those oppressed will express and enact is possibly paved. In this respect by not urging restraint through the levers of diplomacy and military aid and more actively and forcibly discouraging Israel from seeking to aspire to build a Greater Israel from Palestinian lands, the West has been a poor friend to Israel and an even poorer advocate for the values of equality and common humanity in relation to Palestine.

As I have been watching the humanitarian disaster unfolding in Gaza over the past month I have asked myself what does the West stand for if we actively, through the provision of military aid and diplomatic support, allow Israel to undertake a total war response against the people of Gaza that has undertones of genocide? Who are we as nation states if we help to uphold an apartheid style state? If we remove being proponents of equality and justice and thus having a shared and worthy common humanity from our narratives as nation states, what are we other than the conduits for neo-liberal capitalism? 

The scale and extent of the ongoing Pro-Palestine and Ceasefire marches across much of the West indicate that many Western citizens feel similarly disturbed by what has been happening in Gaza. I would argue that many citizens in the West want more from their political leaders on this issue. If we in the West do not stand up for those who are unarmed and unable to stand for themselves in the face of overwhelming military might, particularly if the targeted group is religiously, culturally or ethnically diverse from those who are targeting them and living on land coveted by their aggressors, what do the values of our democratic nation states actually mean? From an ideological and philosophical perspective, what are we in this situation? If the West not only stands aside but actively facilitates through the provision of military aid, the possible genocidal intent of an ally for what purpose do our nation states exist other than as the expression of and enforcement of imperialistic, neo-liberal capitalism? Is this what we want to be, who we want to be? What morality can we stand on hereafter? 

In its ardent support of Israel’s response to the October 7 terrorist attacks by Hamas, our political leadership has allowed its citizens to glance at the realpolitik that often governs our international system. While acknowledging the reality of international politics and relations, for many of us, our political leaders have nonetheless failed on this issue. The question isn’t Israel’s right to defend itself, it of course has that right, as all sovereign nation states do but its total war response on the civilians of Palestine has been disproportionate and most likely in breach of international law. 

As the bombing of Gaza continues as does the ongoing deprivation of food, fuel, medicine, water and electricity to the Palestinians living in Gaza, what gives me hope is watching citizens in the West engage in peaceful mass protest. For decades now neo-liberal capitalism and their political advocates have sought to turn citizens into consumers and it’s been uplifting to witness citizens fire back up on this issue. We impact our nation states. Don’t let neo-liberal capitalism cynically disavowal you of this. While neo-liberal capitalism has sought to make politics and being political an anti-social concept there actually is nothing wrong with reading up on issues and trying to understand something or better yet, trying to analyse it from differing perspectives. We are moving, with alarm speed and rapidness, towards very complex and challenging times. The need to understand our world better has never been greater. In times of increasing peril, the values we espouse as nation states also matter because they will in part determine who and what we will be in the future and what sort of civilisation we will build to try to ensure our survival as a species. Gaza is a horrific line in the sand for us as an international community and where we stand in relation to it does matter. For our common humanity, it does matter. 

Nourish: A Craftmaker’s Tale

What is nourishment? The Collins Gem Dictionary tells me it’s the noun for nourish: feed, nurture, tend, encourage. 

For as long as I can remember I have crafted. My mum taught me how to knit but it was teaching myself how to crochet and weave that truly opened the world of crafting to me. I make things. Blankets, rugs, scarves, cushion covers, cowls, hats, jumpers, tea cosies, coasters, bags, purses and placemats. After watching Coraline I wanted a small Coraline doll so I crocheted one for myself. One of the nicest things about crafting is being able to make things you want on a whim. 

A book about van life first introduced me to weaving. A young woman living in a 1980s Roma caravan spoke about her environmentally conscious, seasonal lifestyle of summers spent at music festivals, fruit picking in the autumn and weaving in the winter on looms stored at her studio. Included in the photos about her caravan were pictures of her woven blankets. This single entry sparked a keen interest in me about weaving and over the course of the next few years, my loom collection would grow from a modest loom I fashioned out of cardboard to frame looms, round looms, rigid heddle looms and finally a semi-automated, Japanese Saori loom. I wish I could say that I am a great weaver but in all truth, I often feel I produce lacklustre results but this doesn’t lessen the allure of weaving for me. I keep trying and every time I dress or warp a loom, I feel a renewed sense of hope and optimism that this time, I will make something really wonderful. 

The crafting I have embraced has always had a strong utilitarian streak. To justify the environmental and social cost of consuming resources for my hobby I try largely to restrict my crafting to making useful things rather than purely decorative items with doll making being the exception. Regardless of what one chooses to make, there is a silent beauty and magnificence in the humble, often inexpensive balls of yarn jumbled around various tables, baskets and work surfaces in my home. These balls of yarn represent the hope of what will one day be made. It isn’t the hobby itself that gratifies but it is the hushed joy of time spent doing pleasant work, of seeing something of material beauty emerge from your hands. 

The thrill of starting a new project and witnessing it reveal itself is to experience a frisson of pure excitement that feels so unadulterated. Crafting nourishes me in a way food and drink does. It is such a part of me that it feels elemental and yet there will be a time when I will no longer be able to craft or hold pieces of yarn. Early onset arthritis will eventually take away my ability to make things. I fervently craft things today knowing that it will come to an end one day and most likely not of my choosing. 

Some mornings I stretch my aching, sore hands and shiver about what life will be like when I can no longer hold the tools of my trade. Similar to life itself, for me, crafting and making things exists on a finite timeline. I see the end even as I am in the midst of the middle. It feels like foresight laced with a heavy sense of loss, foreboding and grieving even though things at the moment are still pulsing, full and bright. It’s odd to see the grimness of a most likely future in the serene joy of the present. 

In the muted surrounds of my apartment, I hear the traffic glide past outside, the ticking of the clock, the quiet scrolling and clicking of the B’s mouse as he browses the internet as he sits next to me at our large dining table and I pass the shuttle back and forth on my frame loom, opening and closing the shed, allowing the yarn to pass through as the small project on the loom begins to materialise. I pause often to run my fingertips over the tabby weave I am creating, marvelling at how nice and orderly the weave looks now that I have finally learnt how to warp my frame loom properly. Time moves fast but also stands still in these silent moments of creativity and quiet work. The rest of life melts away as I only see the taunt, cool whiteness of the cream coloured yarn of the warp threads and the colourful, playful colours of the weft yarn that forms the body of my weaving. I drink in the simplistic beauty of the plain, wooden loom in front of me, relishing the moment as the shuttle passes back and forth, back and forth. In these moments I am at peace. I am at rest. I am nourished. 

While the end is tangible and potentially a barren place for me, the present exists now and I make what I can, while I can and that is all I can do. I suppose at the end of the day, that is all we can ever do. 

Artificial Intelligence, Hollywood, Writing and Creativity: The Value of a Human

Like many I have loved movies my entire life and have an interest in the glitz, glamour and murkiness of Hollywood. For a few weeks now, I have been reading a few articles here and there about the joint strike action taking place in Hollywood by both writers and actors. Alongside the issue of pay, profit distribution and streaming, concern over the potential impact of Artificial Intelligence (AI)I within the film and entertainment industry has emerged as a highly interesting issue. In a recent press conference earlier this month, Fran Dresher, president of the Screen Actors Guild – American Federation of Television and Radio Artists (SAG-AFTRA), revealed that in SAG-AFTRA’s negotiations with the Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers (AMPTP), it was discovered that some studios were advocating for the idea of scanning background/extra actors, paying them a single daily sum and then using their images in perpetuity presumably without additional pay for the actors involved (Hughes, 2023; Roundtree, 2023).

While this type of scanning, also known as VFX photography, is not a new practice or technology within the film industry, it seems to be something that sits uneasily with many actors with some fearing how studios will use their digital images, especially after their death (Lee, 2018). In an interview with Rolling Stone many actors who have participated in VFX felt confused as to exactly what they were being scanned for with many stating there was a lack of paperwork and/or clear explanation as to what their images were going to be used for (Roundtree, 2023). There seems to be a real and palpable unease within the industry that some actors may be replaced by their digital doppelgangers. As Cheyenne Roundtree writes: 

Many voice their fear that those images and/or scans could be later used to train AI programs and develop full-body replicas in their likeness … Matthew Kershaw, Vice President of Commercial Strategy for AI firm D-ID, tells Rolling Stone he understands the concerns around the use of AI when it comes to making sure talent are confident that their images and rights are protected. “I suppose it’s a bit like the invention of the motorcar – no one was going to go back to horses,” Kershaw says, pointing to the implementation of traffic lights, street crossings, and safety provisions to help navigate the change. “What is going to be liberating also needs to be thought through, and you need to have safeguards and protections around it,” he adds (Roundtree, 2023).

In light of the media interest in this story, AMPTP responded to the expressed concerns of SAG-AFTRA and stated that its AI proposal had been misrepresented by SAG-AFTRA and that it did offer protection around the issue of digital replicas for SAG-AFTRA members though many within SAG-AFTRA remain sceptical of the protections AMPTP are offering in relation to VFX and AI. (Roundtree, 2023; Maddus & Rubin, 2023). AI is also worrying those who work in the fields of scriptwriting and voice acting (Smith, 2023). Although deeply concerned about AI’s impact on the future of scriptwriting, The Writers Guild of America, which represents TV and film writers, has not called for a ban on AI, as it was expected to, but urged caution and proposed that chatbots and AI could help with writing scripts so long as writers get to maintain the credit for the writing to ensure that writers and not software manufacturers receive residuals for the writing work (Smith, 2023; Maddus, 2023). Some voice actors are also fearful of how AI might affect their livelihoods. Tim Friedlander, president of the advocacy group, The National Association of Voice Actors, states that some voice actors have expressed concern that their voices are possibly being used to create synthetic voices or “train synthetic voices for machine learning” which might result in unlicensed versions of their voices being used without their permission and therefore depriving them of income and work (Smith, 2023).

As important as these matters are to the writers and actors who need to make a living wage from their craft and to protect the legacy of their work and images, the use of AI in the film industry goes beyond the issue of pay, rights and revenue streams. Other less defined almost existential queries arise as we contemplate AI and its potential contribution to the cultural zeitgeist of our present and our future. For example, what is an authentic expression of a story and of a character and how does its manifestation affect or not affect connection with an audience? If one day, AI could be trained to reproduce in a convincing manner, human mannerisms and expression, would that be as compelling to audiences as real acting done by humans? I know one of the reasons why I love film, theatre and opera is witnessing someone inhabit a role, to watch and observe and be convinced of, the emotional morphing of someone into someone else. 

If a digital representation of a human executed the perfect habitation of a role, would it still feel the same for me knowing that no struggle or turmoil to inhabit a role by a real life actor was undertaken in order to portray this character? Would my investment in their narrative weaken as a result of this? Would it change or affect my connection to the story being told knowing that the portrayal of this character on screen was done through an AI program? It can be argued that in many ways, art just doesn’t exist on a surface level, limited to what the eye sees and what the mind observes. I think the value of art and artistic creation is linked in a rather intrinsic manner, to human struggle, effort and endeavour. 

The imperfect and sometimes tortured way that humans learn to inhabit a role and then execute it is part of the art of acting. It’s why we value it creatively as a society. Acting is fallible, messy and taxing on the actors involved. I marvel at the sometimes bland exteriors actors give off in promotional interviews for their movies compared to the searing intensity of their performances within a role. It makes you realise how much must get consumed and burned up in the creation of the portrayal of a character. How much value does the neurosis, fragility, brittleness and vulnerability that humans bring to art and creative work worth? How much of this is part of art and artistic expression itself and moreover, part of the connection we feel to the art and creative work we consume? 

Another area that I recently observed as having been impacted on by AI is a field far closer to home for me. It is writing. After finding out a little about AI writing tools such as Jasper AI and language model based chatbots like ChatGPT I soon realised that because these models and programs learn through their AI assistant and users interacting with it, AI could more than likely write like me, if not now, then one day. In the near future, I could more than likely have ChatGPT write my blogs and would you, as my reader, know? In this moment of technological revolution, I may have just become redundant, or at the very best, I have come closer to becoming redundant. I don’t use Jasper AI or ChatGPT so I do not know what their limits are nor at what stage of learning they are at so perhaps I have a little while yet to still be useful as a purveyor and examiner of ideas. But very likely AI will one day write a better blog post than I am capable of since it can draw on the vast amounts of knowledge available online and offer far more smooth, grammatically correct writing. But it wouldn’t be me writing and perhaps that is the difference and value of what I offer as a human trying to think and write about these ideas in a manner that I hope is both interesting and coherent. 

My ideas and expression are imperfect and clouded by my perspective. My blog posts will never offer a completely fair, thoroughly researched and exhaustive account of anything. I try to offer well thought out thoughts informed by frankly ad hoc research that I often do on the hop and if you wanted some real information on a subject, your own research would probably be a better option than only just reading my blog post. But perhaps because my writing and thinking is flawed due to it being human based, this is what makes it worth reading. It is my own thoughts and perspective I offer. Maybe the connections we feel to the creative content that we consume are formed because of its imperfections and an understanding and empathy for the struggle of those who offer such things, to do their work well. When asked about the notion of AI writing an entire script, Ben Mankiewicz, a primetime host of Turner Classic Movies states, “I find it very hard to believe that it’s ever going to get the humanity that makes a screenplay great.” (Smith, 2023).

If in the long run, we can survive ourselves and the system we have created to live under which seems to be actively destroying the single planet we have to call home, what is the future for AI in relation to its contribution to the collective cultural pool? More importantly, it can be asked, does the output of the work of AI in the fields of writing, art, music and entertainment reflect and represent us as a human society? Where is the line between machine and human in regards to creative endeavour? If it has been made by a machine, can it be said to be an embodiment and representation of human emotion and stories? On some level, because of how AI programs learn, the answer is yes it can be but without an active human hand present within the creative process, will it be as relatable? 

This brings us to a large question, why do we create? I feel the answer is fairly obvious: we create because we are expressive beings. A more pertinent question for me is why do we seek out creative content? Why do we watch movies, livestreams and YouTube, read books, listen to music, look at art and read online blogs and articles? Sometimes it’s because we are trying to learn new things but oftentimes it’s also because we are seeking out something ephemeral from our fellow humans. A connection and a desire to feel something, to be stimulated or inspired by emotion, ideas or thoughts. 

The predictions about the impact of technological revolution on our society and how we interact with it are never complete or resolute. Remember how computers were meant to make offices paperless? There is no doubt that work will be lost to AI. I have read anecdotally that some writers have already been losing writing work to AI as some former clients turn to AI to generate marketing copy instead of employing a writer. We are at the beginning point of AI. What it is capable of seems to be rather immense and as such, it is quite improbable that we can predict at this present stage what its impact will be, both positive and negative. As David Smith writes for The Guardian:

AI is already earning comparisons to the agricultural revolution, industrial revolution and internet revolution. It is moving fast and gathering speed. The most profound effects for Hollywood and elsewhere have probably not yet been imagined (Smith, 2023).

I agree with Matthew Kershaw, Vice President of Commercial Strategy for AI firm D-ID, that safeguards and protections will be needed around AI as it rolls out but this seems easy to say and difficult to define. How do we know what safeguards and protections we need in relation to AI if we do not know how it will grow, learn and impact on us? I don’t think we should not seek to develop AI but who will define for us as a society what protections and safeguards are needed around AI? Ethicists? Government? Surely it would be reckless to leave it to those who are developing AI to determine their own safeguards and protections. Industry has often shown reluctance to properly self-police and self-regulate. Nick Bilton who has been covering the development of new technologies for over twenty years, writes in Vanity Fair:

GPT-3 is far from perfect. It can be wonky, repetitive, even racist. As TechCrunch noted in 2020, GPT-3 language models have associated the word Islam with terrorism, and female pronouns with the word naughty. That’s because it’s crawling text that has been written by humans in the past. These platforms are learning not from other A.I. entities but from us —which has its upsides from a creative standpoint, and its downsides from a humans-are-jerks perspective. Dall-E’s own documentation warns that words like personal assistant and flight attendant will generate images of women, and words like CEO will likely give you white men … The question is, will the creators of these platforms be able to discover the negatives before this tech is released into the public? (Which, let’s be honest, has never happened before in technological history.) Perhaps it will take years to foresee all the potential outcomes of these services. There’s a fun irony in the thought that the only thing saving our jobs from being replaced by algorithms is the fear that humans will do terrible things with the technology (Bilton, 2022).

Many of the articles I have read about AI end ominously. I think we are in danger of technological advances outstripping our ability to have the time to think about the ethics and impact serious and far reaching technological advancements like AI will have on our society. We rush into the future because there is money to be made by the few and many of us, despite ourselves, still nurture hope in our hearts that the future is still a bright, hopeful and better place than where we are today and surely wondrous technology will be part of that amazing future. I would like to think this too but my honest opinion is that without seriously dealing with climate change, I don’t see how we can have much of a future at all. But if we were able at some stage to ensure the long term health and safety of our planet and climate, I think we need to give studied thought about what makes us connect to artistic and creative endeavour and whether AI can fulfil what we seek when we look for the thing within art and creative work that soothes our souls and inspires us. Within this thought, you surely will find the value of a human. 

References: 

Bilton, N. (2 June, 2022). The New Generation of A.I. Apps Could Make Writers and Artists Obsolete. Vanity Fair. https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2022/06/the-new-generation-of-ai-apps-could-make-writers-and-artists-obsolete

Hughes, W. (13 July, 2023). SAG accuses studios of wanting to scan extras' faces so they can own them forever. A.V.Club. https://www.avclub.com/sag-accuses-studios-of-wanting-to-scan-extras-faces-so-1850638753

Lee, C. (12 December, 2018). Digital Doubles Are Revolutionizing Hollywood. But Why Do Movie Stars Hate Them? Vulture. https://www.vulture.com/2018/12/why-do-movie-stars-hate-being-digitally-scanned.html

Maddaus, G. (21 March, 2023). WGA Would Allow Artificial Intelligence in Scriptwriting, as Long as Writers Maintain Credit. Variety. https://variety.com/2023/biz/news/writers-guild-artificial-intelligence-proposal-1235560927/

Maddaus, G. & Rubin, R. (13 July, 2023). SAG-AFTRA Declares Double Strike as Actors Join Writers on Picket Lines. Variety. https://variety.com/2023/biz/news/sag-aftra-double-strike-wga-amptp-1235669492/

Smith, D. (23 March, 2023). ‘Of course it’s disturbing’: will AI change Hollywood forever? The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/film/2023/mar/23/ai-change-hollywood-film-industry-concern

Roundtree, C. (22 July, 2023). Hollywood’s Fight Against AI Puts Background Actors in the Spotlight. RollingStone. https://www.rollingstone.com/tv-movies/tv-movie-features/hollywood-actors-strike-ai-background-visual-effects-sag-aftra-1234792405/

A Look at Third Way Politics

 A few years back, someone wrote to me a great turn of phrase: “ageing out of the zeitgeist” and I thought “yes, that is me”. As surely as my hair turns grey with the passage of time, the recognisability of pop culture and its icons has faded also. I no longer recognise, let alone know the name of those who are paid handsomely to spruik various consumer products to me as I traverse the internet. The swirling allure, glittering snap and surly snarl of youth culture has truly left me behind and I am completely comfortable with that. I don’t mind not being young.

What is more startling of late has been the realisation that I have become old enough to start seeing and reading historical analysis of my formative years. More specifically, historians are beginning to be able to look with some degree of distance at the ideology and the political culture of the socio-political phenomenon that defined my high school and university years: the Third Way. It’s fascinating but also somewhat jarring to witness the ideas of my youth passing into history.

What inspired this post was recently reading an article in The Nation by Lily Geismer analysing the much vaunted but also heavily criticised Third Way politics of the late twentieth and early twenty-first century. I will link the article here: How the Third Way Made Neoliberal Politics Seem Inevitable. I was a child of the Third Way. I believed in it and it fueled my idealism and interest in politics as a youth. Standing in the far flung and little visited political science wing of my high school where my politics and law classes were held, I saw my future in politics and my youthful heart was captured by the idea of making a better world through building consensus and harnessing the profits of capitalism to help to create fairer and more prosperous communities. Generally speaking, these were the ideals of the Third Way and I passionately wanted to be part of the cohort taking us into what appeared to be a bright and hopeful future.

I became an ardent advocate of the type of consensus politics the Third Way promoted as the elixir to class division and I rallied behind its call for the shedding of the old parochial left and right divide. B was one the first people I met in my social circle who did not admire the Third Way. He said unprintable things about Tony Blair at a time when Blair was riding waves of unimaginable popularity as ‘cool Britannia’ dominated the zeitgeist. I was shocked and shook my head sadly at the crusty, old dinosaur politics he seemed so enthused about as a member of a socialist party. Touting my Tony Blair and Bill Clinton biographies alongside my political science textbooks, I proudly and loudly occupied what I thought was the political centre.

Third Way politics can be broadly described as this:

The Third Way is a centrist political position that attempts to reconcile right-wing and left-wing politics by advocating a varying synthesis of centre-right economic policies with centre-left social policies (“Third Way”, 2023).

A central plank of the Third Way was the idea of consensus politics. Consensus politics is not something the Third Way thought of but it certainly reinvigorated it during the late twentieth century. Prior to the Third Way, it could be said that there existed a strong sense of consensus politics during the postwar period between 1945 and 1970 in many developed, Western democracies when governments on both sides of the political spectrum endorsed public policies that protected social safety nets, advocated for government intervention in the economy, promoted government ownership of national industries and called for full employment (tutor2u, 2021). It is generally thought that the consensus politics of the postwar era started to fray in the 1970s as the oil shocks of 1973 and 1979 took hold and economies stagnated with inflation skyrocketing leading to stagflation in many developed economies (tutor2u, 2021; “1970s Energy Crisis,” 2023). As the socio-political fallout from stagnating economies reverberated at the political level, consensus politics began to break down with the advent of Thatcherism and Reaganomics effectively ending it. Some have even characterised Thatcherism as the outright repudiation of the consensus politics of the postwar period (“Thatcherism,” 2023).

Into this political landscape stepped the Third Way. From the outset the Third Way had its critics with many commenters disturbed by its ambiguity and apparent lack of substance (Geismer, 2022). The Third Way shimmered like a political chameleon, flashing reassuringly to the right with its neoliberal economic policies and making soothing noises to the left with its social rhetoric. In truth, the appeal of the Third Way most likely rested in it doing exactly this. I think that many who advocated for it wished for the continuation of capitalism as an engine for wealth creation for our societies but wanted the cruelties and excesses of capitalism to be curtailed by strong public policy legislated from democratic and representative parliaments. Without doubt, some of the faith in the Third Way more than likely rested on a certain naivety in regards to fully grasping the nature of neo-liberal capitalism and how it would interact with our political systems. I suspect very few centrists thought that neoliberal capitalism would capture our socio-political systems so ruthlessly and with such levels of totality.

In theory at least, Third Way politics is predicated on having a healthy and strong social democratic system in place which is renewed and supported by an informed and engaged citizen base. But as Geismer discusses, the real life enactment of Third Way politics and policies in its effort to dominate and determine what the centre is actually helped to erode social democracy by inhibiting the development of progressive, movement based politics:

The third way also proved instrumental to another key post–Cold War undertaking: discrediting and marginalizing movement-based coalitions on the left, stigmatizing them as holdovers from the recently resolved—in capitalism’s favor—postwar clash of ideologies. In many ways, the most lasting legacy of the third way may well be its determination to consign the political left to the dustbin of history, setting the stage for the new millennial age of reaction and crisis (Geismer, 2022).

Despite the extensive damage Third Way politics and ideology would do to the left, some of which is still reverberating through the centre left today, Geiser correctly identifies why the Third Way seemed so appealing at the time it appeared:

… it would be a mistake to dismiss the third way as just another errant fad in a fickle decade. For all its imprecision and shallowness, the third way represented a genuine shift in thinking about the role of government and ideology. It emerged from the efforts of political thinkers and leaders across the West to move beyond the divisions of the Cold War and face the new challenges of globalization and the information age (Geismer, 2022).

My belief in Third Way consensus politics more or less held until I began to recognise that we had entered late stage capitalism. Perhaps moving into a new century helps to facilitate an analysis of the previous century though in historical terms, not that much time has passed as yet. However, the slow hollowing out of our democracies as capitalism’s grip on our political representatives became more blatant and obvious, the profits that flowed out from multinational behemoths in the face of dwindling social safety nets, stagnating wages, modest homes becoming unaffordable for a substantive number of salaried people and witnessing how things like medical care and even the purchasing of fresh fruit and vegetables have become unaffordable for some has forced me to recognise something deeply uncomfortable. The consensus politics of the Third Way seems to have yielded a pathway for the realisation and near domination of neoliberal capitalism.

As Geismer observes in their article, Third Way politics did not find a way for capitalism and social democracy to co-exist. If anything it helped to blunt the potency of social democratic politics and policies as the Third Way co-opted and then hollowed out the meaning of the ideas behind progressive, socially democratic public policy. Geismer writes:

By describing the third way as “progressive,” the New Democrats ensured that the left lacked a key term to define its own politics. It meant that groups on the left had little room to create meaningful dissent from the third way or the agenda it represented. Robert Reich, who was freer to speak his mind after resigning as Clinton’s labor secretary, observed in an interview with The Nation’s David Corn that if the third way did not gain more substance, it would “leave the progressive left in tatters and do little to rectify the social injustices experienced by modern capitalism” (Geismer, 2022).

Why did Third Way politics seemingly help to realise Margaret Thatcher’s slogan “there is no alternative” in regards to society embracing the tenets of neoliberal capitalism? Chiefly, it can be argued that at the heart of Third Way public policy were the same goals and assumptions that drove neoliberal capitalism. That is, privatisation through private and public economic relationships and the deregulation of markets combined with a weak vision, if not lack of real commitment, to the social protections that would be needed to buffer the community against the socio-economic consequences of having achieving the economic agenda of the Third Way (Geismer, 2022). For all intents and purposes, the goals and policy objectives advocated by neoliberal capitalism were achieved through the centre left via the Third Way. There is no easy way to write that and it’s hard to swallow but how can one argue with history? Was there another way for the Third Way? Possibly if there had been a greater commitment to a more interventionist manifestation of it which would have sought to reinforce social safety nets alongside genuinely pushing for progressive politics but it’s also very hard to say because the economic agenda of Third Way was so driven in ideological terms by neoliberal ideals. Its economic agenda stood in conflict with its social aims.

It could be said that the Third Way has somewhat tarnished consensus politics. The politics and ideas of the Third Way certainly have emptied of much meaning what the centre left stands for and pushed the centre overall further to the right, normalising ideas that have been strongly influenced by neoliberalism. If the Third Way has shown me anything, it’s to be more critical in analysing whose favour the consensus is for. Furthermore, in assessing the Third Way it’s difficult to argue against B’s assertion that it made democracy safe for capitalism. 

But more worryingly, consensus politics itself could be something of a fallacy because it assumes that the left and right can converge in a type of post-ideological political landscape. But for this to truly occur, politics has to become de-politicised and when this is done, it is usually because there exists an active and powerful hegemony and hegemonic power in place because behind the enactment of hegemony is power and what drives power is ideology of some description. But not all hegemony is necessarily bad, if it rests on principles of fairness, equality and justice then perhaps it will be benign if not beneficial to humanity. Our job I guess as citizens is to recognise and witness hegemony and possibly attempt to break it if it threatens to destroy our ability to survive long term as a species or when it no longer is representative of what the majority of us advocate for as a society. Hegemony and ideology have become deeply present aspects again of our society and our political landscape, both domestically and internationally. Multiple crisis beckon in the new century and the need for informed and engaged citizens has never been greater as democracy stands on a new precipice and with reason as some people ask this question: why should they invest in a system that doesn't invest in them? 

References:

1970s Energy Crisis. (27 April, 2023). In Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1970s_energy_crisis

Geismer. L. (13 December, 2022). How the Third Way Made Neoliberal Politics Seem Inevitable. The Nation. https://www.thenation.com/article/politics/third-way-dlc-bill-clinton-tony-blair-1990s-politics/

Thatcherism. (27 April, 2023). In Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thatcherism

Third Way. (27 April, 2023). In Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_Way

tutor2u (22 March, 2021). Study Notes: Consensus Politics. https://www.tutor2u.net/politics/reference/consensus-politics Retrieved 27 April, 2023

Not Too Many Questions or Too Much Eye Contact Please: Finding and Caring For My Introvert Self

“You don’t talk. It’s the quiet ones you have to watch out for.” 

Working on the conveyor belt sorting out small silver spheres that would eventually be shipped to the US to be minted into quarter dollar coins, my workmate’s attack was as vicious and blunt as it was unexpected. Up until then I had quietly been listening to the swirl of chatter bubbling up from the women who were working the belt alongside me. I was floored and didn’t know what to say. Being young and full of vinegar I might have snapped something brief and snarly back but I realised then that quietness was no longer really an option for me in my workplace. I needed to force myself to pretend to be what I really wasn’t: an extrovert, a people-person. I would have to force myself to make small talk and every time I did it, it would be death by a thousand, tiny cuts.

I worked my factory job for a little over a decade and every day I would come home dirty from the grime and sweat of the workday, sometimes physically exhausted from the heavy work. But arguably the heftiest toll was the mental and emotional depletion caused by the constant interaction that the work day obliged. Being quiet and a good listener, bored workmates would sometimes unload onto me, not understanding that my sensitivity led me to feeling almost injured at times by some of the details and things they told me about their private lives. Things I didn’t want to know. I came to my workplace to earn my crust. I wasn’t there to make friends or bond with people and yet it became hard not to care about these people because I knew too much about them not to. Sometimes my supervisor or leading hand would take pity on my exhausted looking self and knowing that I enjoyed solitary work, I would be offered a few hours of solo work but even then they themselves would come into my work space to make desultory chit chat. The only place I found solitude during my working hours was when I locked myself inside a grimy toilet cubicle. For those precious moments I could rest and recharge.

To be an introvert is to be quite misunderstood at times. You are frequently seen as a troublemaker for not integrating better into cultures often dominated and set by the standards of extroverts. Your quietness and strong desire to be left alone is regularly misinterpreted as anger, sullenness, surliness, bitchiness, coldness or superiority. To this day I don’t think some members of my own family accept that I am an introvert with many of the accompanying needs and quirks that being an introvert entails. The only person who really accepts me as I am is B, a fellow introvert. His own friendship group once expressed disbelief at how we can be together all the time but what they don’t understand is how introverts share space: together yet alone. B and I are often wrapped up in our own pursuits, happy to be in each other’s presence but giving each other plenty of space to be. After we have had sufficient “alone” time together, we’ll reconnect and chat about what we’ve read or seen or we’ll binge watch some Netflix. Currently we are watching an amazing series called Fauda. I highly recommend it.

But the truth of the matter is that for the longest time I thought there was something really wrong with me and my lack of socialising. I strongly felt that I needed to have vibrant social outlets in order to be ‘normal’. Thus, I forced myself to do things like cosplay, to participate in community projects in my local neighbourhood and join various online chat groups like Discord. It was all quite terrible at times. I enjoyed some of it but most of the time the overstimulation of the experience meant that I was locked into a cycle of activities that left me feeling exposed, frazzled and drained. It’s been only very recently that I have given myself permission to step into my comfort zone and let the noise and clutter of my social life fall away. I do socialise still but not very much and only with a very small circle that you can count on one hand. Without really intentionally doing so, I discovered my introvert self and saw how beat up and haggard she was and I took her to my heart and said, “enough.”

Part of this process began several years ago when I discovered that I might be HSP: a Highly Sensitive Person through a marvellous TED talk by Elena Herdieckerhoff which I will link here: The gentle power of highly sensitive people. However enlightening this TED talk was for me, the real legitimising framework for feeling comfortable enough to allow myself to be the introvert that I am came from reading The Secret Lives of Introverts: Inside Our Hidden World by Jenn Granneman. It was equal parts comforting and shocking to read my personality traits jumping out of this book. It explained and talked about so much of what I knew about myself in a positive light whereas for most of my adult life, these traits and quirks have persistently been discussed with me and about me in mostly negative terms. I agree with Granneman that sometimes labels can help. In my particular case, calling myself an introvert has been a profound relief because I am no longer just a weirdly unsociable person who may or may not be maladjusted. Instead, I am someone who contributes differently and quietly, in my own way, in my own time and on my terms. It gives me great confidence to frame my personality in this way and by perceiving B as a fellow introvert, I can also understand him better now too.

Blogging is my way of reaching out in the world and I thank every reader who stops by here or the music blog. Blogging allows my inner world to reach outwards. I am so grateful to have a place where I can write and share my thoughts and I look forward to writing again next time.

Sentinel States: A Look at Sub-Imperial Power: Australia in the International Arena by Clinton Fernandes

For the longest time B has been hassling me to read Sub-Imperial Power and after finally doing so, I can understand why. It is a small but quite mighty book that helps to define in somewhat new terms, Australia’s place within the current world order and how that has affected the country domestically. Since being published in 2022, it has rapidly become a recommended book for political, international relations and foreign policy wonks because it discusses in clear and understandable terms, a new and highly useful paradigm for analysing Australia’s international role in the world system: sub-imperialism. 

Fernandes walks us through their reasoning as to why Australia could be classed as being part of a sub-imperial network as opposed to being a middle power, such as Norway. The primary reason is based on an analysis of the nature of Australia’s economy and Australia’s defence strategy. Fernandes states that Australia is a ‘wealthy but dependent economy’ and elaborates on this by writing:

During the colonial period, British investment fostered vertical economic ties with London more than horizontal economic ties integrating the economies of the Australian colonies. Typically found in imperial-colonial relationships, such vertical economic relationships result in monocultural economies that produce mineral resources and agricultural goods for export. That legacy remains with us (Fernandes, 2022, p.21).

As an Australian, it has always struck me as rather odd that this country’s economy seems to shrink away from becoming a more complex economy and selling more than just raw materials to our trading partners. In light of climate change, it seems tenuous that our primary exports are chiefly the minerals we dig out of the ground and agricultural products we more often than not ship out as unprocessed, raw goods. Diversification and thus increased complexity of our economy seems to be something that we ought to embrace but have not. As Fernandes points out, this makes the Australian economy highly unusual in the developed world in that Australia is a developed, prosperous, stable and functional nation state but it also has the economic complexity of a developing nation such as Cambodia or Kazakhstan, thereby making it a wealthy but dependent nation (Fernandes, 2022, p.22). 

Why has Australia fostered this dependency and/or allowed this dependent state to continue? Some of this can be explained by examining who owns what in Australia and also by looking at how Australia and its exports integrate into the world economy. Outside of minerals and agricultural products, Australia boasts relatively small sectors of specialised manufacturing such as aircraft manufacturing and repairs and some automobile manufacturing. Australia, like many nation states, is part of a system of global value chains (GVCs) where a company’s headquarters, design and engineering, finance, raw materials and manufacturing are often located in separate countries (Fernandes, 2022, p. 24). Fernandes notes that GVCs are the dominant international corporate model of the present day with approximately 80 percent of international trade comprising of the movement of goods and services across international borders between the departments of the same company (Fernandes, 2022, p. 24). Foreign investors are largely comfortable with GVCs and their ability to generate substantial wealth removes much impetus for either international investors or nation states to embrace increased complexity within some economies (Fernandes, 2022, p.24). This is one reason why Australia remains largely economically un-complex and highly specialised in some areas in regards to its exports.

Another factor, as mentioned previously, is ownership of capital. Fernandes draws our attention to the fact that according to data obtained from the Bloomberg Professional Terminal, approximately three quarters of the shares in the top twenty companies listed on the Australian Stock Exchange (ASX) are foreign owned (Fernandes, 2022, p.22) Given the relatively small market capitalisation of the ASX, this accounts for roughly half of the market capitalisation of the entire exchange (Fernandes, 2022, p.22). Without doubt, mining and fossil fuels plays a dominant role in Australia’s economy and it was surprising to discover how much of it is US majority owned. BHP is 71 percent US owned, Rio Tinto is 77 percent US owned, Woodside Petroleum is 63 percent US owned, Newcrest Mining is 53 percent US owned and South32 is 47 percent US owned (Fernandes, 2022, p.48). The only big hitter not US majority owned is Fortescue Metals with the majority of the shares owned by the Forrest family through its commercial group, Minderoo which was rebranded as Tattarang in 2020 (Tattarang, 2020). 

As it can be seen, foreign investment in Australia plays a predominant role in Australia’s largest and most influential corporations which in turn accounts for a substantial portion of Australia’s business interests. It’s particularly enlightening to note the high proportion of mining companies that are US owned. Thus, it can be argued that Australia’s economic interests are irrevocably tied to the creation and maintenance of US led world order that emphasises a benign environment for international investment that does not threaten US hegemony (Fernandes, 2022, p.22). Interestingly, Australia’s largest trading partner is China and it goes to show the complexity of wealth generation today with US majority owned companies selling minerals and fossil fuels to undoubtedly its most virulent potential rival for hegemony in the new century, China, via Australia’s raw material and export network. This conflict embedded within the current capitalist system supports Alex Callinicos thesis that the world we are facing today is more reminiscent of the situation the world faced before the outbreak of World War One rather than the Cold War primarily because the great powers of the world today have complex, highly interconnected yet conflictual trade links with each other (Callinicos, 2023). History has therefore demonstrated that a global and complex capitalist world order does not necessarily inhibit the outbreak of conflict between rival great powers. 

What is also of note is how fluidly Australia exchanged dominant investors from Britain to the US as Britain lost its ability to project power in the postwar period and the US repositioned itself as a superpower alongside the USSR. But Australia’s role within the economic and trade network of a greater, imperial power remains the same: to be primarily a supplier of raw materials. Australia’s dependent role could be said to be partially enforced through the persuasion of ownership of capital and the nature of GVCs but it's also a role Australia willingly cultivates. Australia’s economic contribution to the US global economy enmeshes it with America. It puts Australia within the imperial network of this global power and it is a place Australia very much wishes to be. 

Australia has always seen itself as part of an imperial network, firstly it was part of the British colonial empire and since the postwar period, Australia has rallied to be part of the US foreign policy plans to establish sympathetic and US armed sentinel states in the Indo-Pacific region that ideally would include Australia, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, the Philippines, Thailand, Singapore and India (Fernandes, 2022, p.43). America’s ability to project power in part lies in the concept of interoperability with sympathetic, junior, partner nation states adopting similar aviation, ground combat and air defence networks to that of the US, making the militaries of these countries almost interchangeable with the US in regards to operability and the ability to deploy in a coordinated fashion (Fernandes, 2022, p. 9). The US also projects power through a network of international military and surveillance bases that allow it to survey and deploy assets and resources in an area stretching from Western Europe, East Asia and into the Eurasian landmass (Fernandes, 2022, p.13). As Fernandes notes:

It is the only country whose military is designed to leave its own hemisphere, cross vast oceans and airspace, and then conduct sustained, large-scale military operations in another hemisphere. This imperial objective is why the US Navy has eleven aircraft carriers while most countries have no more than two; it aims at influencing the entire land mass from Portugal to Japan, from Russia’s Arctic coast to India, as well as all the fringing islands such as the United Kingdom and Ireland, Sri Lanka, archipelagic south-east Asia and Japan (Fernandes, 2022, p. 13).

In keeping with our long held sentiments about our place in the world as part of an imperial network, Australia has often shied away from independence. The British parliament gave up control of the Australian parliament through the passing of the Statue of Westminster act in 1931 yet four Australian Prime Ministers delayed adopting it until 1942 (Fernandes, 2022, p. 25). It makes cultural and historic sense that Australia would seek a place within America’s imperial, postwar system and that Australia would find it comforting to become a junior partner with a greater power that culturally bears many similarities with Australia as well as having a similar world view. 

But what makes Australia not just a junior partner but sub-imperial? Why are we not a middle power? Our determination to make our military interoperable with the US military as evidenced the recent purchase of at least eight nuclear-powered submarines as part of the AUKUS partnership which seeks greater and deeper military activities and ties between Australia, the UK and the US and our foreign policy objectives such as the decision to go to war in Afghanistan and Iraq is indicative of Australia’s near total alignment with the geopolitical, foreign policy objectives of the United States ( Fernandes, 2022, pp. 28-29). Australia actively supports America’s imperial objectives in much the same manner as it did when it was part of the British colonial empire:

Military historians are well aware that Australian governments have not gone to war for sentimental reasons or because they were duped. Upholding the imperial order was an essential component of Australia’s security, properly understood: the security of economic interests and the military-political order that secured them. For a subimperial power, imperial wars are never ‘other people’s wars’ (Fernandes, 2022, p. 35).

This explains why Australia has often involved itself in far-flung wars. Australia’s security is dependent upon helping to uphold the geopolitical and foreign policy objectives of a greater power to whom we are in junior partnership with. Australia by and large does not have nor does it seem to want a separate military strategy outside of a dependent and junior partnership with a larger, imperial power. But Australia’s economy, military and intelligence services are not the only reasons why Australia could be deemed as being sub-imperial. As a nation state, Australia also seeks to have its own small sphere of influence in Timor-Leste and the south-west Pacific (Fernandes, 2022, p. 16). 

Australia accepted Timor-Leste’s independence in 2002 but it effectively prevented Timor-Leste from obtaining its economic independence by refusing to negotiate a maritime boundary along the median line in the Timor Sea and withdrawing from the maritime boundary jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice and the International Tribunal on the Law of the Sea in 2002 ensuring Timor-Leste could not assert its legal right at these forums (Fernandes, 2022, p.55). Both of these actions amounted to the denial of Timor-Leste’s right to its sovereign oil and gas reserves in the Timor Sea (Fernandes, 2022, p. 55). Though a treaty between Timor-Leste and Australia was eventually signed in 2018, Australia refused to compensate Timor-Leste for any past exploitation of oil and gas reserves in the Timor Sea, some of which should have gone to Timor-Leste had a median line been established in 2002 (Fernandes, 2022, pp.55-56). Australia has also encouraged the cultivation of a small but politically powerful middle class, urban elite within Timor-Leste who are in general, favourably disposed to the creation of shared habits and procedures with Australia, joint military exercises and making Timor-Leste compatible and receptive to international investment (Fernandes, 2022, p.56). Though independent in name, it could be argued that Timor-Leste functions with degrees of imperial oversight by Australia who has had a hand in influencing key decisions of Timor-Leste as well as obtaining some level of control over its natural resources (Fernandes, 2022, p. 56).

Australia also seeks to assert influence in the south-west Pacific though with arguably less effectiveness. In April 2022, it was revealed to the shock of many Australians, that China and the Solomon Islands had made an agreement regarding ship visits, logistical replenishment and other associated activities (Fernandes, 2022, p. 94). Australia often seeks influence in the region through the provision of aid but unlike Chinese aid which tends to remain within the Solomon Islands, Australian aid tends to flow back into Australia through the payment of Federal Police, civil servants, magistrates and private contractors who work in the Solomon Islands (Fernandes, 2022, p. 96). Aid monitoring group Aid/Watch observed in a submission to the Australian Senate in 2014, Australia is the “largest direct recipient of its own aid funding” (Fernandes, 2022, p. 97). Despite not always obtaining its desired outcomes in the Solomon Islands, I would concur with the notion that Australia does seek to influence the domestic and international decisions of key sovereign states within the south-west Pacific region in a manner that has imperial overtones. 

Sub-Imperial Power finds its most convincing and persuasive narrative when it discusses Australia as being a sub-imperial power. It somewhat loses focus and effectiveness when it strays from this and when it tries to frame multiple aspects of Australia’s political and cultural life through the single paradigm of being a sub-imperial power. The idea of Australia as being a sub-imperial power is a highly relevant and useful concept for understanding Australia both internationally and domestically but I believe it is not Australia’s complete totality as a nation state. Rarely does a single narrative or conceptual framework explain how and why a nation state manifests itself domestically and internationally as it does. I also felt that Fernandes’ analysis could have benefited from examining China with more critical rigour than what was presented in the text. However, overall Sub-Imperial Power deserves the praise it has been given because it has launched into the general discussion regarding Australia’s place in the world, a relatively new and highly useful concept. It is an accessible text that is deliberately small and simplistic in its analysis for ease of consumption. Like the Communist Manifesto and other such pamphlet-like material, it is designed to be read by a broad readership with ideas and thoughts that are digestible. Its contribution to the discourse is much appreciated and worth reading if you are interested in foreign policy and understanding modern day imperialism. 

References:

Callinicos, A. (2023). The New Age of Catastrophe. Polity Press. 

Fernandes, C. (2022). Sub-Imperial Power: Australia in the International Arena. Melbourne University Press.

Tattarang. (13 May, 2020). The Minderoo commercial group rebrands to Tattarang. 

https://www.tattarang.com/news/2020/the-minderoo-commercial-group-rebrands-to-tattarang/

Introduction

Hi. I'm Hammie. I am also known as HammieRiffs and I write a music blog which can be found here: This Metal Road

Outside of music I am deeply interested in ideas, politics, history and writing. It is here on this blog that I wish to explore these interests and I hope you will enjoy my thoughts and writing about these topics. 

Thanks so much for stopping by. 

Hammie.