A fields day for the morally bankrupt conservatives

Using aspects of criminalisation to understand the riots is a very simplistic and lazy approach. It is lazy because it lacks any sincere and genuine research into the context of the events of public disturbances. It further proves to be morally bankrupt and neglects crucial social justice issues and dismisses reviews of welfare policy.

Meanwhile, low socio-economic positions of disenfranchised youth are maintained and they continue to experience further exclusion from the national mainstream. Devine uses the example of Cheri Burton, a parliamentarian who grew up in Minto public housing as proof that these youth are not disadvantaged. Such simplistic reasoning does not address the harsh realities of inequality in Australia, where there exists a massive disparity between the achievements of individuals from privileged backgrounds and individuals from low socio-economic backgrounds.

Adopting an alternative perspective that recognises issues of social disadvantage - one that is so enthusiastically belittled as “do-gooders” - does not aim to excuse the criminal actions of youth or justify assaults on police. Another misconception is that it suggests all police are bad and irresponsible. On the contrary it points out how police officers are misused and blamed for “soft policing”, where crucial issues of social justice and the review of welfare policies are overlooked.

In hindsight, we can learn a lot about the riots, particularly the method in which a hierarchy of the “haves” and “have nots” is maintained. Discourses of Otherness and criminalisation reigned, proving that a “fields day” was experienced by conservative political actors and commentators.

Though this inquest is just beginning, it seems the focus is on removing responsibility from the police towards the community, and vice versa. Once again crucial issues are neglected, and the interests of low socio-economic communities such as the Macquarie Fields residents continue to be excluded.