Australian Republic Constitution
Australian Flag News Get Involved! Events Resources
Our Mission
To preserve, to protect and to defend our heritage: the Australian constitutional system, the role of the Crown in it and our Flag
Main Menu
ACM Home
Convenor's Column
Media Releases
Event News
ACM News
Resources
Cost of Republicanism to the Taxpayer
About ACM
Anthems
Links
Contact ACM
Join our Mailing List
Facebook
Aussie Crown TV
ACM Videos
Polls
Should republicans be required to agree on precisely what changes to the Constitution they want before Mr Rudd calls another referendum?
 
 
Do you agree with the proposed "Super Profits Tax"?
 
 
Login





Lost Password?
No account yet? Register
Syndicate
ACM Home

History Wars Print E-mail
Written by Professor David Flint AM   
Wednesday, 02 September 2009

The Prime Minister’s speech launching Thomas Keneally's “Australians: Origins to Eureka” has left  historian Dr Greg Melleuish scratching his head. “It is an odd piece,” he writes in “Leave history alone,” The Australian 1 September, 2009. “For example, it includes the statement: ‘The love for history is, I believe, the handmaiden of country.’ I have thought hard about what this means but I still do not have a clue; it is just meaningless sludge.”

Image
[ No black armbands here ]


He says that the history wars to which Kevin Rudd refers long predated the prime ministership of John Howard. “They came to public prominence because the agenda of the black-armband brigade was taken up by Paul Keating as part of his ‘big picture’. Their willingness to use history for political purposes provided useful ammunition for Keating on matters such as indigenous affairs, the republic and multiculturalism.”

He says the Prime Minister’s approach does not go the history wars; rather he is intent on entrenching it.  “He seems to think that historical inquiry consists of a constant cycle of celebration and condemnation. “This, says Dr Melleuish, is not the purpose of studying history.

““Historians seek to understand the past, to gain an appreciation of how and why people acted in the way they did.
“Historians who begin with moral presuppositions, whose concerns are primarily with contemporary political issues, will invariably fail in their endeavour. They will lack the empathy to understand the actions of humans who were quite different from them. “The division of the past into good and bad events is futile. Sometimes bad things happen through no one's fault. For example, the British settlers were not responsible for the diseases they carried with them that wreaked havoc in the indigenous population.

“It is not the job of the historian to right the wrongs of the past. They are not prophets, nor will the nation be redeemed if it collectively repents the actions of a past generation. Responsibility for actions in the past lies with the individuals who made them, not with those living decades or centuries after those actions.”

 


  Add new comment

Only registered users can write comments.
Please login or register.

Powered by AkoComment Tweaked Special Edition v.1.4.6
AkoComment © Copyright 2004 by Arthur Konze - www.mamboportal.com
All right reserved

 
< Prev   Next >

Defend the Constitution and Flag
Australian Election Watch

10th Anniversary Neville Bonner Oration

The Book Depository

10th Anniversary and Appeal

Crowned Republic 

   Keep The Australian Flag
Return the Governor to Government House
Events
September 2010 October 2010
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
Week 35 1 2 3 4
Week 36 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
Week 37 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
Week 38 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
Week 39 26 27 28 29 30