Like what you've read?

On Line Opinion is the only Australian site where you get all sides of the story. We don't
charge, but we need your support. Here�s how you can help.

  • Advertise

    We have a monthly audience of 70,000 and advertising packages from $200 a month.

  • Volunteer

    We always need commissioning editors and sub-editors.

  • Contribute

    Got something to say? Submit an essay.


 The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
On Line Opinion logo ON LINE OPINION - Australia's e-journal of social and political debate

Subscribe!
Subscribe





On Line Opinion is a not-for-profit publication and relies on the generosity of its sponsors, editors and contributors. If you would like to help, contact us.
___________

Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Rights, the republic and participatory democracy

By Tim Anderson - posted Friday, 24 March 2006


The debate over a constituent assembly could re-engage the public imagination, and support identification with important shared achievements in Australian history.

So, for example, instead of a chauvinistic nationalism (which seeks to generate some excitement over the failed invasions of Turkey, Vietnam and Iraq) Australians might prefer to identify with the overthrow of the White Australia Policy and the recognition of Indigenous custodianship. We might also embed in our constitution the popular renunciation of aggressive war, a consistent mechanism chosen by the oligarchy to ingratiate itself with the imperial power. Similarly we could give formal recognition to our immensely popular universal health care system, as a means of protecting it from betrayals through the “free trade” deals which would further displace Medicare with private insurance schemes.

It was precisely the fear of such a wide ranging debate that led elitists such as Paul Keating and Malcolm Turnbull to propose the “minimalist” republic, with no role for citizens.

Advertisement

It is true that participatory democracy can be wild and unpredictable, and can lead to the derailing of elite agendas. Yet such a wide ranging project as a constituent assembly could forge a popular and vibrant definition of national identity. A Bill of Rights would be an important part of that process, and would become one of the key measures of Australian citizenship and therefore also the new Australian republic. The failure of the elite model of 1999 gives us that chance.

Of course, a Bill of Rights might be prepared in a single line law, which simply adopted into Australian law the International Bill of Rights - the two covenants which Australian politicians signed years ago. This would be very neat. But, in the unlikely event that such a move succeeded, would it not create yet another weak national institution which the Australian oligarchy would rapidly corrupt, and which the public would fail to defend?

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. All


Discuss in our Forums

See what other readers are saying about this article!

Click here to read & post comments.

16 posts so far.

Share this:
reddit this reddit thisbookmark with del.icio.us Del.icio.usdigg thisseed newsvineSeed NewsvineStumbleUpon StumbleUponsubmit to propellerkwoff it

About the Author

Tim Anderson is a Senior Lecturer in Political Economy at the University of Sydney.

Other articles by this Author

All articles by Tim Anderson

Creative Commons LicenseThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Photo of Tim Anderson
Article Tools
Comment 16 comments
Print Printable version
Subscribe Subscribe
Email Email a friend
Advertisement

About Us Search Discuss Feedback Legals Privacy