FBI Radio 28 April 2010

Hey everyone...

This week on sociologic FBI Radio I looked at a couple of issues that will be affecting our lives... here they are:

1. Time for lazy kids to get off the dole

Last week, Tony Abbott announced that if his government was elected, they would make unemployment benefits subject to age requirements. This is one of the silliest policy suggestions for a long time and I explained why. The discussion on FBI Radio was based on an article I wrote for Newmatilda.com which is available here...

2. Climate change back flip

This week, the Prime Minister Kevin Rudd announced that the government would be shelving any plans for a carbon trading scheme! This is one of the great political back flips and highlights three key things:

• The first is a lack of political courage on behalf of the Rudd Government. They claimed this to be a key moral challenge of our time and pushed it as a way to split the Opposition. When the Opposition stood up to them, they backed down. This is a shame;
  
• Secondly, it highlights that there are a number of dinosaurs in the Opposition. Tony Abbott is more interested in scaring the public than discussing the issue. I have written extensively about the overwhelming evidence for human-induced climate change but the same dinosaurs that believed passive smoking was not a problem have now turned their attention to climate change; and
  
• That climate change may well be too complex an issue for our political system to deal with. If everyone waits for someone else to act, then we are in serious trouble...
  

For a great read about this political back flip check out Ben Eltham’s awesome piece.

If you want to let Kevin Rudd know this is political cowardice, then I suggest you sign up to the Get Up petition.

Thank, james

Socio-logic this week - 14 April 2010

Hey everyone


This week we had a pretty big week on socio-logic with so many things happening…


The f-word conference


This conference was held in Sydney over the weekend of 10-11 April 2010 to discuss contemporary feminist issues - something we should all be interested in.


Over the years I have found that many of my students feel that feminism has become an dirty word: something that they cannot relate to or is relevant to them.


This is deeply problematic as many of the issues that have faced women remain in our society. Sure, we have a female deputy prime minister as well as a female CEO at Westpac Banking Corporation but there are some fundamental inequalities that remain that we must confront as well as new issues that have emerged.


For example, women are still the primary carers for children and elderly parents and do more housework. They tend to do this while balancing careers or simply casual/part-time work. We still have a small percentage of women in executive/senior positions and women earn about 60 percent of what men do in the same positions: these issues have been raised repeatedly by some impressive and successful women including Ann Summer, Eva Cox and Jane Caro.


There are also some new issues that need to be confronted. The rise of cosmetic surgery and the pressure on women to remain looking young is incredible.


Again, this does not dismiss the amazing achievements by many women or the changes in our society, but does return us to why feminism is so important: structural inequalities and discrimination remains in our society – and women often suffer from these.


It is for this reason that feminism is as relevant today as it has ever been.


Unfortunately the f.word conference blog has not been updated but please keep an eye out on some of the amazing things that are happening with this group and I am sure there are more to come: though this article appeard today in the SMH by Nina Funnell.



2. The decline of western civilisation?


The Sydney Morning Herald’s Phillip Coorey reported on a get together over the weekend of conservative thinkers including former Prime Minister John Howard and Arch Bishop Cardinal George Pell.


This is part of a broader trend of conservative thinkers who have been raising concerns about the ‘direction’ in which our society is heading.


I too hold some concerns – mostly to do with the fact that we seem to worship economic growth and progress ahead of everything. Authors such as Ronald Wright and Jarred Diamond have raised such issues: both authors I recommend you read.

This was not the focus of this group. Rather their concerns revolved around issues such as:

• - The collapse of Judeo-Christian values;
  - The rise of secularism;
  - The emergence of a strong green movement;
  - Loss of the family unit; and
  - The influence of Islam in our society.
  
  

These types of concerns are nothing new and have emerged throughout Europe and the USA. The issue of the direction of society is important but I found their concerns miss the mark. For example, why would a religious ethic be more important that a secular ethic? We should not dismiss one, nor the other.

Further, we are not been over run by other religions but are a multicultural society: and many young Muslims are adopting secular values as much as Christians are.

The family unit is important – but there is no reason that non-traditional family units including same sex couples are not just as important.

Rather than being concerned about these issues, these incredibly influential and bright men (and some women) should focus on tackling some fundamental structural issues in our society: poverty, inequality, environmental degradation, displacement of people, racism and so on.

If we could sort these issues out then we would live in a better world and no matter your religion, you cannot disagree with that.

Refugees

Over the last few months the Rudd Government has been under increasing pressure by the Abbott Opposition to respond to the number of refugee boast arriving in Australia. This resulted in a freeze in processing applications from those seeking refugee status from Sri Lanka and Afghanistan.

Australian migration has a long and problematic history based around the fear of invasion. I do not have the time to write about this now but it I worth check out Ben Eltham’s piece on this from New Matilda.

We are part of a global humanity and to take this position on the most vulnerable shames us as Australians. There are better ways to do things and we should expect more from the Rudd Government.

Screw light bulbs: real climate change solutions

Can we have a clean, green future? Yes we can! This is the message from a new nook by Dr Donna Green and Liz Minchin. Their book is being launched at Gleebooks this Thursday evening – come along if you can – as well as buy the book to see some of the solutions they offer.

That is all from me… remember to email me at askjames@fbiradio.com if you have any questions or leave a comment below.

Cheers, james

Sociologic this week... 31 March 2010

Hey everyone

This week on socio-logic things got very exciting! To begin with, I got my own ‘introduction’ – a pre-recorded message introducing the show! It is called a ‘sting’ in radio talk and I was so excited that I almost bounced out of the studio!

On the show this week we covered the following...


1. Internet filters

The federal government is keen to introduce an internet filter to attempt to stop us from accessing internet sites we should not access. Whenever I hear the words ‘child pornography’ uttered by politicians, I always think of moral hazards. Yes, this is a problem but the tool that is being proposed is expensive and almost useless.

We do not know which ‘other’ sites are going to be blocked but we are being told they will be terrorist sites or ones that insight violence. This ‘blacklist’ of sites is secret and this raises questions of integrity and censorship. We also need to understand how sites make it on this list: for example, would a charity that raises money to work in places such as Palestine and have to deal with one of the militias there be placed on such a list?

Working in such conflict zones is complex and have to be negotiated – grey areas that can well be treated as black/white with such a process.

A better policy would be to provide free, controllable internet filters for Australian households and put the money into sorting out real problems.


2. China v. Google

This is another internet story with Google stating that they will no longer work with the Chinese government to filter out sites.

The Chinese government and Google cut a deal that would allow Google access to the Chinese market if it filtered out sites associated with the Falun Gong , Tibet and so on.

Google has rightly pulled out of the deal – and we should acknowledge this. It has been pointed out, however, by the super cool Jason Wilson that this is not as selfless as it appears: Google has reversed a decision in which it was criticised for about a market that it is finding it hard to break into.

Whatever you feel about the decision, the important part is that we are having conversations about censorship.


3. Forestry and koalas

I received an SOS call about a proposal to undertake forestry in the South East Region Area of NSW. The Conservation group in the area have noted that: "State Forests, the NSW Government logging agency, is demanding to woodchip the koalas’ forest home.”

This is one of the final areas of koala habitat in this part of the state and we are talking woodchips! That is, cutting down trees for low value products: not even high value timber products. This is the “last tiny colony of koalas on the south coast live in Mumbulla and Murrah State Forest. There are only 30 to 50 of them left in the whole south east region” (according to the press release).

So... we can only assume that this is a political decision rather than an economic one. My advice, email the Premier, Kristina Keneally and politely ask her to stop this. The email address is to get on is: premier@nsw.gov.au


That is it from me...

Speak soon

james

This week on FBI... 10 March 2010

Hey everyone

I have been absent for a couple of weeks due to semester starting last week. There has been much happening and rather than working though everything I wanted to mention a just a few things:

• Being out west: Homophobic violence

To begin with I was lucky enough to be invited to chair a symposium looking at homophobic violence in Western Sydney. It was an amazing evening with stories of both violence and also hope – as some who had confronted violence spoke out against it. About 100 people showed up and each of the presentations where amazing...

What was obvious is that homophobic violence remains a problem in Australia – not just ‘out west’. The statistics are harrowing and I encourage everyone to speak out against it.

I wrote an article on the event for New Matilda available here...

• Parental leave

A big ‘battle ground’ looming with the federal election to be held sometime later this year is ‘paid parental leave’. This was highlighted this week when the leader of the Opposition stated a new position on parental leave which brought a chorus of criticisms from many sides of politics.

Abbot’s position seems not to have been greatly conceived and it concerns me that this will undermine a scheme that was due to be put in place by the Rudd Government which is to start 1 January 2011.

I hope this is not the case.

What we should remember though, is how far the debate has come (reflecting the fact that societies are constantly changing).

If you want to get a great overview of some of the debates on this issue, check out this piece by Eva Cox – a former colleague of mine who is also a good friend.

• Night time research project

A group of friends and colleagues at the University of Western Sydney are undertaking a research project into ‘The City After Dark’.

The group wants to know what you get up to after hours and your ideas and opinions could well shape the future design of our city.

To undertake the survey click here or for more questions call the research team at (02) 9685 9493

Ok... that is all from me...

Do not forget to email me at askjames@fbiradio.com if you have any questions...

Cheers, james

Sociologic - 24 February 2010

On FBI Radio's sociologic this week we covered two areas that have been in the news quite a bit lately.



Population numbers: the elephant in the room


The first topic was about the most sustainable number for Australia’s population. This was based on an email inquiry I received from a FBI listener as well as an article I wrote for newmatilda.com. This population question has always been a sensitive one and has been described as ‘the elephant in the room’.


The article I wrote about this can be accessed here…


In essence, I argue that asking about ‘the correct size’ of the population misses the point because there are other issues surrounding sustainability. As you will see from the comments below the article, it caused quite a bit of controversy…



Housing affordability…


The second (related) topic was about housing affordability – who can afford a house in Sydney? This follows a recent report that shows housing affordability continues to decline.


This is a complicated issue with no quick fix solution – which was noted in a government inquiry no that long ago. The problem for a government is that if housing prices rise, it locks people out of the market; but if prices fall, it means that people have loans for a house that is higher than its value. This means they will try and sell it quickly and this causes a panic in the market and a downward cycle. It is this very process that led to the Global Financial Crisis.


If you have the time, check out the government report – but for me, there are three things that need to be done as a matter of urgency:

1. Focus on medium density housing: it is better to have a smaller city with more numbers that have sprawl. These have to be well designed and environmentally sensitive houses that are well serviced by public infrastructure such as schools, public transport and shops;
2. Change the taxation status for investment property: the fact that people buy into investment properties drives up the prices. It is a much too generous tax break and needs to be reviewed; and
3. Make renting more attractive: this means offering 5 to 7 year leases rather than 12 months. It means people have more security and are more likely to rent.

Finally, there will be an amazing forum this week as part of Mardi Gras: looking at homophobic violence in Western Sydney. It is on Thursday, 25 February at 5.30. Details are available here…


Thanks for listening and reading


Cheers, james

Socio-logic - week of 25 January 2010

Hi everyone


On this week’ socio-logic featured on FBI Radio, we covered two incredibly important and relevant topics.


Australia Day and nationalism

The first was nationalism and Australia Day. Over the last 15 years, mainly driven by the previous Howard Government, we have seen increasingly prominent displays of nationalism. This has been as evident at schools as it has been at events such as the Big Day Out. The new ‘Australia Day uniform’ seems to include the Australian flag as a cape.


I am not one to portray a great deal of nationalism – I prefer more subtle that outlandish displays.


Saying that, I do think it is important to acknowledge the history and show pride of one’s country – both the positive and negative aspects. In Australia, the positive aspects such a long tradition of democratic values is something we should celebrate. We should also acknowledge the dark parts of our history, such as the Aboriginal Stolen Generation, so we can repair the mistakes and ensure they are not repeated.


While there are many definitions of ‘nationalism’, it essentially refers to pride and devotion to the interests or culture of one's nation. This does not mean ‘blind’ or ‘absolute’ devotion – simply that someone feels a connection.


I believe that nationalism is a double edged sword. On the positive side, it involves helping others in our community no matter their background, acknowledging our national mistakes and ensuring that our nation plays a key and positive role in international affairs. This is an inclusive nationalism – we are proud to be Australian but not at the expense of other people or cultures.


One author who takes this position is Tim Soutphommasane. His recent book on ‘Reclaiming Nationalism’ discusses a progressive nationalism in detail. I really enjoyed it and recommend you read it if you want to know more about this aspect of nationalism.


The dark side of nationalism is exclusionary: where we see ourselves as better than others and other cultures as inferior. This is the nationalism that is aggressive and was one of the reasons for the Cronulla Riots a few years ago. Negative nationalism can be violent and includes slogans such as ‘f#%k off we’re full.’


John Burmingham wrote about this type of nationalism the other day. It is a great article and worth a read.


Haiti earthquake and the international response

The second topic this week was the Haiti earthquake and the international response. Before continuing, it is important to acknowledge the great work being done in Haiti by some excellent organisations including Oxfam (who I work with), MSF and the Red Cross.


The problem with aid and humanitarian work is that it is as much about politics as it is about helping others. This is a point that organisations such as Aid/Watch raise frequently: noting that the aid project is as much about ‘pursuing our national interest’ as it is about poverty relief. Such twin objectives are reflected by other governments also, which means that the relief effort in Haiti has been as much about certain nations and organisation advertising themselves as it has been about emergency relief.


Naomi Klein talks about this in some detail in her blog and is certainly worth a read.


It is a tragedy that this is occurring – and something that we should demand our governments change: aid should be about sustainable poverty relief and should not about Australia’s national interest. Contact Aid/Watch for more information (and please note, I work with these guys also).


Contact me at askjames@fbiradio.com if you have any questions.


Cheers, james

Socio-logic with James - FBi Radio (19 Nov 2009): feminism and slavery

Hey everyone

The last couple of weeks have been crazy so I have not had a chance to post my blog with the usual enthusiasm, but I am back this week.

This week on FBI Radio (94.5 fm), I covered 2 broad areas: feminism (yes, the ‘f’-word) and modern day slavery.

The feminism story was inspired from the news the week before of the some of the degrading rituals that some Sydney Uni residential colleges follow. Alex and I discussed this on air but alas, no blog. For a great read, however, check out the article by Carina Garland.

So let’s look at this week’s issues...

Is Feminism still relevant?

For some background on gender, sex and feminism check out my blog below.

To begin with, we should understand that feminism simply means the push for political, cultural or economic rights and legal protection for women. (See, it is not a scary word!)

We can look at the challenges facing women both in Australia and internationally. These are different challenges and should not be simply grouped together. What is important however, is that challenges still on exist both on the economic and social front (again, see below for some evidence I provide) as well as check out the figures provided by the Australian Human Rights Commission.

Feminism is about confronting these challenges with the goal of equality: and I think remains relevant today though the challenges, in Australia, have changed.

I call myself a feminist – and believe that it is just as relevant today as ever.

Modern day slavery

Slavery ‘officially ended over 200 years ago, but unfortunately, it persists today. Though exact figures are almost impossible to come by, it is estimated that that there are 27 million people around the world today are being held in slavery. To think about the size of that, it is the Australian population plus another 7 million! Figures indicate that this illegal industry generates up to US$100 billion per year.

One organisation working to stop slavery is Free the Slaves, which was founded in 2001 as well as its UK sister organisation Anti-Slavery International (which is the world's oldest human rights group).

Slavery is essentially the ownership of a person: they become like any other commodity (like a pair of shoes: unfortunate example, but this is something that we need to be brutally honest about).

Free the Slaves draws an important distinction between slavery and extremely exploitative labour, though they also admit that this is a very thin line.

Sweatshop workers are exploited by being forced to work long hours under difficult and abusive conditions with little pay. Slaves face the same conditions, but additionally they cannot walk away – having lost all their rights and free will.

Further, most slaves are paid nothing at all, and the physical and psychological violence used against them is so complete that they cannot escape their slavery.

Both Free the Slave and organisations like Oxfam Australia and also many organisations like Apheda which are associated with labour unions work on these issues.

What is important here is that we can all do something about this – our everyday actions can break down slavery and overcome sweatshop conditions.

Follow the hot-links to find out how you can help (as well as get more information).

Cheers, james

Socio-logic with James - FBi Radio (28 Oct 2009): population and religion

Hi everyone

This week on socio-logic with the amazing Alex Pye on FBI radio, we looked at some controversial issues… would love your thoughts…

Population growth: what should Australia’s population level be?
http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/editorial/challenges-of-our-growth-spurt-20091025-hely.html

The Prime Minister recently got excited about the idea of having 35 million people in Australia. Ken Henry, Treasury secretary responded by raising concerns about Australia’s ability to handle this – fair point.

I have historically avoided talking about population growth and environmental issues because it makes me feel that we are adopting a ‘life boat mentality’ and we can use it as an excuse to exclude people (here I am thinking refugees). This has been described as the ‘greening of hate’ by the very cool Betsy Hartmann.

I think we cannot shield ourselves from what is happening around the world including population growth and herein lays the issue: the problem is not with the poor countries with big populations, but with us. That is, we use way more resources than they do.

In fact, if everyone used the same resources as an Australian, we would need four earths to support us! (Check out this website on eco-resources.)

There are two ways around this that would also act to deal with the excess resource use that is threatening our planet:

a) The first is to build smarter cities: mass investments in public transport and green medium density urban environments; and
b) We should get used to using fewer resources!

We are better off doing this now in a negotiated way and having a response to the issue of population growth – not have it forced upon us at some future point.


Religion v. ethics in schools
http://newmatilda.com/2009/10/06/dumbest-education-policy-australia

The issue of religion or scripture in public schools has always perplexed me. I only realised recently that it is done as a compromise between the State government and the Church in a deal struck in 1880 (see article above).

When I was at school, many of us avoided religious studies because we could not relate to the teachings – so we just kicked the ball around instead.

The Parents and Citizens Association has recently proposed that ‘ethics’ could be taught in parallel with religion as a way of giving non-religious children and families an alternative.

I think this is a great idea and it could act as a way of discussing the many ethical dilemmas to modern life: how can anyone be against this. Further, any teaching of ethics must include religious ethics because the frameworks are related.

In seems that sections of the Church are against it however – it seems more because it sets a precedent than because they do not like the idea. What a crock I say!

Teaching on ethics are important – both religious and secular – and are part of a well-rounded education. In fact, I have had a long association with a number of religious groups who are strong advocates for human and environmental rights: and there is no reason why these things should be in conflict. For the State government to squander this opportunity is to let us all down: well those of us who believe in a well rounded society anyway.

For some information on ethics teaching, check out the St James Ethics Centre who designed the proposed program.

Speak soon

james

Socio-logic with James - FBi Radio (21 Oct 2009)

Hey everyone

This week on FBi Radio (94.5 FM) we got into some serious stuff. It was a week when Parliament has been sitting and throwing mud at each other in debates that my first year students at University of Western Sydney undertake with much better dignity!

This week’s stories…

1. Refugees and Australia:

We started by looking at the Australia's attitudes to refugees: it felt like we were going to return to the Howard Government era of fear and hate towards some of the world's most vulnerable people. A brief look at the lives of those who risk their lives shows that we need a more humanitarian approach: click here for a discussion by Australia's Human Rights Commission!

There is no doubt that race plays an issue here, but as I have written for the Centre for Policy Development, I do not think we should take a simple approach by saying Australia is a racist country.

What is needed is leadership - and while the Prime Minister did not show a great deal, a number in the ALP stood up to be counted (as did the Greens Senator Bob Brown). The truth is that refugees flee countries because they have little or no choice - it has nothing to do with Australia's policies. These are human beings like us and we need to show humanitarianism rather than use it for political advantage - as the Liberal Party seem bent on doing: see a great piece by Crikey here.

2. Political Donations

The issue of political donations was the second story discussed. The question is: do political donations corrupt democracy? I have discussed this previously in a paper looking at the need to reform the system and make it more transparent (read it here).

There is no doubt that when someone makes a political donations there are, at least some, strings attached. The questions is how many strings?

I think that we need to demand more from our politicians and ask them to reform the system. All donations over $1000 should be made public and no longer should there be such cozy relationships between big business and government. Even if there is nothing to worry about, the truth is that the perception that such a relationship means 'favours' are being done, we are seeing the undermining of our democracy.

Ok, that is it for now... join me next week on FBi!

Cheers, james

Socio-Logic with James (on FBi Radio)

Hey everyone

As some of you may know, I have a regular gig on FBi Radio (94.5 FM). It is a trial for 6 weeks so let’s hope that they like me and keep me! (You can email them and tell them I rock or even better subscribe to keep independent radio alive and well in Sydney).

I am on Up For It with the cool and funky Alex Pye every Wednesday morning at about 8.15 am, so please tune in!

This week’s stories…

1. Pay to use the internet:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/10/10/2710367.htm

This week at a conference in Beijing, the News Corporation chairman, Rupert Murdoch, criticised online companies like Google – saying they were ‘content kleptomaniacs’. His argument is that Google makes money by directing people to content loaded by organisations such as Fox News and Sydney Morning Herald, and they should pay (and by extension, we should pay).

The internet has always been a battleground since its development as corporations have always tried to commodify it and make us pay, while the open source software movement has always believed that this is something that we all own as it was built by our tax dollars and should remain free. An amazing guy here is Lawrence Lessig – you should check out his work!

I am all for free content – and think Rupert’s move is a negative one. He never establishes why we should pay to visit his site: is it better than everybody else’s? I do not think so: it is just a way to enclose more area for profit.

Watch this one – I think it will heat up – and get ready to get active to protect what is owned by all of us already (a true commons) – in which corporations are already making money off!

2. Climate camp

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/10/11/2710652.htm?section=justin

The second story was a discussion about Climate Camp – which is a community of volunteer’s environmental group – that has emerged because they believe that the government is not doing enough to combat climate change: and I think they are spot on the money!

The Climate Camp ran for three days at Helensburgh near Wollongong. This was symbolic because it is the site of one of Australia’s oldest coal mines and the NSW government, despite everything we know about carbon emissions, coal and climate change, has decided to expand it! (Note that residents are also concerned – not just about the emissions, but the risk to the local environment and water quality).

The meeting culminated with about 500 protesters blocking and closing down the mine on the Sunday afternoon. It was a peaceful protest though 13 people were arrested.

I am all for non-violent civil disobedience – it may be the only way to make people list and confront power.

Again, watch this space – I think we are going to see a whole lot more of these leading up to the climate negotiations in Copenhagen later this year. (Click here to be linked to Oxfam Australia's discussion and background information and Copenhagen).

Join me next week on FBi!

Cheers, james