International
Truly stupefying …
NOTE TO READERS: The story below is not satire. Call it irony, a plea for a more compassionate society – in fact whatever.
But it is the last entry in the short history of the New Examiner.
Writing satire is easy. Ignorant people; dodgy Governments, pretend politicians with sufficient hubris to ignore the traffic rules – they are everywhere, and their collective stupidity engulfs us. They are easy and obvious fodder for satirists.
Yet there are undercurrents in our society that make writing satire problematic. As I’ve been quoted as saying elsewhere, there are two kinds of people in this world – those that `get’ satire, and those who don’t. The first group understand that making fun of our failings, fragilities and obsessions is not an attack – it is simply another perspective on the wonderful idiocy of the world that surrounds us.
The second bunch are more problematic. Faced with a situation beyond their comprehension, they resort to the tactics of a thug; threats, intimidation, and most concerning – demands for restrictions of the freedoms they claim to admire.
Sadly, it appears the second bunch outnumber the first, at least in parochial little Tasmania. Those doubting this claim need look no further than our daily newspapers – feedback from readers is less a collective response to a changing world than the roar of a lynch mob ready to string up anybody threatening their closeted, Robert Menzian view of the world.
The use of the war in Afghanistan in the previous story is deliberate. A tragedy has been unfolding in that country ever since Western nations decided to impose their own view of culture and government on what is basically a medieval collection of warring tribes.
A tragedy it is, and will continue to be. We can’t change that. Having Australian troops in that country defies logic, and contradicts the will of the people.
Yet we glorify the deaths of Australian volunteers who fight there, and condemn those who flee their own country as `illegals.’
Last week, our government debated how to deal with the human cost of the Afghanistan war – which we conveniently put in the `asylum seeker’ basket. We came up with no solution.
That’s not surprising. Many Tasmanians believe the brave people fleeing death, torture and the bombing raids of NATO forces should be either left to drown near our shores, or sent back to a war-destroyed country. Then the fate of asylum seekers was quickly overshadowed by the stupifying debate over where a Big W should be located in Launceston.
So that’s it. Not funny I know, but perhaps its time for a more serious political debate about Tasmanian politics, culture and society. Message me with ideas.
It’s been fun.
Martin Gaylord – publisher in chief
First published: 2012-07-04 06:06 AM