A
COMMENTARY ON PETER McLAREN’S
“ASIA
AS AN OTHER IN THE AUSTRALIAN IMAGERY”
McLaren
started his
essay by distinguishing the Asians as the outgroup from the Australians
as the ingroup.
Down
a few more lines it became tolerably clear to me that his concept
of Australian is one of Anglo-Saxon origin. Accordingly, if the Asians
are the outgroup and the Australians the ingroup, where does he place
the other nationalities?
The
first Anglo-Saxons came to Australia in 1788. A mere 60 years or so
later, in 1850, the first migrants (mainly middle class Europeans
who could afford the passage, and Asians, predominantly Chinese) arrived
here, looking for gold. The races mixed and the population tripled.
That is how Australia began its multiracial society a century and
a half ago!
Why
this little lesson in history? To demonstrate that in McLaren’s
viewpoint, the difference between an Australian and the Other is 60
years!
Anglo-Saxon
Australians, I have discovered, are renowned for imposing their superiority
on two types of Other: those who do not look Caucasian; and those
who may look Caucasian but speak English with an accent, bar an American
or British accent. At the same time, they are generally pleasant towards
these Other. Why? Because Anglo-Saxon Australians, whilst openly flaunting
their racism, are also wary of its wrongness. Thus, they feel the
need to absolve themselves of their “sin” and do so by underestimating
themselves whilst flattering the very ones they discriminate against.
McLaren’s paper reflects this view. It is biased, ambiguous and
hypocritical. Despite the research involved, most of its contents
are irrelevant and the essay bears no weight.
Maria
Lopes
6 March 2003