I welcome the contribution of Harry Feldman to the debate on the
question of the solidarity of anthropologists. The editors of the
establishment anthropology journal Oceania, on the other hand, did
not find the issues raised (genocide) to be up to the standards of
their publication. Quite.
There is much of what Harry says with which I can only agree. The
Northern Territory Land Rights Act is not a suitable model for
national land rights. I regard the land claim procedure (to land
which is claimable under that Act) as an arrogant form of
inquisition - a playground for members of the Anglo-Australian
elite to refashion the creation in their own image. It provides a
little relief for some people - and that must be welcome. But,
yes, we cannot afford to rest here.
Where Feldman and I do not agree, as he has correctly identified,
is that I have a vision of anthropology where it is in the service
of people. "People's anthropology" I call it.
There is much truth to the actual situation as Harry has outlined
it. But I feel he tends to draw definitive boundaries - to present
things as 'clear cut' - when the situation is actually more
confused. There are academic anthropologists who do not completely
embrace the establishment values of the institutions which have
erected themselves on the living countries of the First People.
They, too, are mystified by what is an extremely confusing
situation in Australia. They, too, debate the elitism which has
taken over anthropology in the name of 'professionalism' during
the last decade. Anthropology is not a profession, I say, it is a
vocation - a calling. Life calls.
Many anthropologists (but how many I don't know) do not think that
the restructuring of the Australian Anthropological Society, which
took place during the eighties, to be appropriate. In the name of
professionalism, class distinctions were introduced into the
membership so that the only the high flying elite - Fellows -
could be office holders. Ordinary members were excluded from
occupying decision-making positions.
This type of elitism is all too familiar to anthropologists. It is
typically neocolonial. Those with the values of upward mobility
are guaranteed positions while those of us with values a little
closer to the ground are silenced. The same process is at work
with ATSIC - and needs to earthed.
The staggering thing is that anthropologists, who write and study
this exact thing, went along with it. They were hoodwinked into
accepting that it was necessary for there to be a corporate style
code of ethics (if that contradiction in terms means anything) and
that their behaviour should be regulated by from the top down.
This was the argument for restructuring into an accreditation
mechanism for what was, formerly, a pretty good meeting place.
I personally tested this code of ethics the year it was brought in
( 1990) by seeking to have the AAS hear a grievance of mine, as a
member of the public, against one of their leading members. He
had designed the code of ethics. Guess what - it couldn't be done.
The new arrangement was a complete and utter dud - but those now
in control have made no moves to surrender their power. Too
comfortable, and I am easily dismissed as just a ratbag.
And happily so, I might add, for the price of their style of
respectability is the earth itself.
Personally, I don't see anthropology as a science. Nor do I think
it should seek to emulate science. This is going in the wrong
direction. Science has taken life right off the rails.
Rather, I see anthropology as a dialogue between the people of the
world. Anthropologists are craftspeople who develop parts of their
mind and Being by transcending the local limitations which we call
'culture'.
These limitations are not absolute. The anthropologist is a person
with as much chance of transcending the linitations imposed on him
or her as anyone else. I do not understand why Feldman is intent
on insisting that they are unable to transcend their 'own' culture
- and I call on him to respond to this point.
Our 'own' culture comprises that of the world, not just of the
neighbourhood.
I accept the philosophy that life is all one family. The barriers
which separate us from each other - such as the notion of
'nations', 'race' 'tribe' 'professions' - are the inventions of
interests which benefit from placing the emphasis on differences
rather than similarities. Divide and rule.
The project at hand, as D.H. Lawrence recognised, is to put some
of the recent images of life respectfully to rest and to recreate
an awareness of our relationship to the living cosmos. We can
learn much from the First People. Life is all one family. We are
all one family.
Perhaps I need a new term, rather than 'anthropology', for I
acknowledge that much of anthropology has been carried out in the
voice of an elitist European establishment. Membership to the
'club' of science has been a highly sought after prize by previous
generations of anthropologists. And they were prepared to make
nonsense out of other people's lives to achieve this acceptance.
And yet, I am reluctant to meekly surrender anthropology to this
elite as if it was theirs by right. No, I am prepared to fight
them for it! Anthropology, like the resources which prop up the
present regime, is not the property of an elite by virtue of the
laws of inheritance. Adam Smith and Darwin both got it wrong.
If we cannot win over the anthropological society - to bring them
onside with life's struggle - then what hope do we have of
winning over the people who presently give their allegiance to the
dominant Anglo-Australian formation?
The anthropologists are important players in all of this. Let us
not be to hasty to tar them all with the same brush. Open
mindedness, although an energy drain at times, is better than
imposing false stereotypes on life. Life's messages flow through
the open mind.
Seek the flowering of the anthropological mind. It has been
fertilised by the enriching experiences with the wonderful people
of the world. I see a healing anthropology possible. There may, or
may not, be a crust in this for the professionals.
Anthropology will not always remain the handmaiden of colonialism.
Will the songs of life always remain imprisoned within the
constrains of the commercial recording industry? No -
of course not. Life will find a way around vested interest
because life is the stronger.
Most people who bought the model of professionalism - which seeks
to separate them from their relatives - have been moving down the
wrong path. Look at the physicists who gave us nuclear warfare
against life ("Just testing," they say). Look at the managers of
corporations pushing toothroot drinks on kids. Look at the
industrial chemists developing their poisonous sprays. Look around
- who is not up to their armpits in it?
We can learn from the First People that life can heal itself -
ourselves. Part of the cure is to realise that a cure is possible.
Racism can be cured. Genocide can be turned around. Living the
wrong way can be cured. People can change their practices -
anthropologists included.
Yes, let's see some anthropological analysis of the workings of
life in Anglo-Australia. And lets see some anthropology on the
forces which fill the jails, brothers. Let's expose to the light
of day the processes which continue to generate the illusion that
the representative human face of Australia is white, speaks
English as a first language and rules by self-proclaimed right.
Let's see some anthropological analysis of how the social
conditions of the working people are presently in the process of
being further sacrificed on the altar of the illusions of good
management which prop up the Westminster system.
And, if no-one objects too strongly, I'll continue to call on my
brothers and sisters in the academic institutions to come to their
senses and put their whole Being into a struggle which they
presently partly support. There's plenty to be done.
Let's heal those who lead. It is only our silence - our complicity
- which allows them to take the wrong path. The false
consciousness of our leaders is the responsibility of us all.
Sing us all back to health.
Earth the Being of us all.
Yours in solidarity this day of the general strike in NSW.
Bruce Reyburn
23 October 1991.