Good and TERRIBLE (unacceptable [Content Warning] threats of violence) responses to a bad comment about colonisation

A text message by the “no” campaign in the name of Senator Jacinta Price has led to: 

• understandable and, in my opinion, well justified outrage at the invasive, unsolicited message and the lies it contained; 
  
• subsequently, extraordinary comments by Senator Price that she considered colonisation had done no harm (!), which in turn led to: 
• a strong rebuttal   https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2023/sep/14/jacinta-nampijinpa-price-says-colonisation-had-no-negative-impacts-on-indigenous-australians   (see also https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/series/the-killing-times); 
• unacceptable abuse and death threats after the Senator was doxxed   https://thenewdaily.com.au/news/politics/australian-politics/2023/09/14/jacinta-price-voice-text-message/  
  

I also got the text message, and was annoyed enough at the blatant lies that I considered sending a reply, but chose the just block the number. 

I consider Senator Price to be wrong in her comments about colonisation (I also have intergenerational trauma from both sides, as she does, and I know they have both had an impact, but the harm done by colonisation is the greater), and in her opposition to the Voice. That she has those positions is, in my opinion, quite possibly a measure of the intergenerational trauma she has experienced - a variation of Stockholm Syndrome, in a sense.

Be that as it may, she has the right to express her views - but must do so reasonably, including not stopping others expressing their views. Threats of abuse or even death - by either side - are attempts to stop people expressing their views - and drag us down to a lower level. 

The original text message may also be an example of what is termed a “civility trap”, which is a despicable method used by bigots. On that, from Mastodon (Ive edited this to generalise it):

A civility trap is where a [targetted minority] person receives an intentional provocation. If the [targetted minority] person responds with understandable frustration/anger, they are perceived as unreasonable / unhinged / untrustworthy. The original provocation is forgotten.

 

Assumptions / basis 

In writing this, I have assumed / started from the following: 

• this blog states quite clearly that it is about political and human rights matters, including lived experience of problems, and thus I will assume readers are reasonable people who have noted the content warning in the post header;

Possible flaws 

Where I can, I will try to highlight possible flaws / issues you should consider:

• there may be flawed logical arguments in the above: to find out more about such flaws and thinking generally, I recommend Brendan  Myers’ free online course “Clear and Present Thinking”; 
  
• I could be wrong - so keep your thinking caps on, and make up your own minds for yourself.
  

 

If they are of any use of interest, the activism information links from my former news posts are available in this post. 

 

If you appreciated this post, please consider promoting it - there are some links below.

Vote Yes for the Voice in Australia.  

Finally, remember: we need to be more human being rather than human doing.