Sim lent me The Politics of Suffering after a conversation about how to think about western ideas of improved health and other life outcomes not being an unquestionable objective of white engagement with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people and communities, and it's been a very worthwhile read, especially given my current work.
Its two major challenges to conventional (white) progressive thinking - and my own - are its arguments that:
The way it's written, as well as the depth of experience, knowledge and empathy that Sutton brings, makes it clear that The Politics of Suffering isn't meant as an apologia or Trojan Horse for simplistic conservative attitudes to the topic, and having read it more or less twice all the way through, I'm inclined to be at least open to that first argument (although it makes me very uncomfortable, and what its nuanced acceptance means for the messy, contested realm of public debate and policy-making, with all its ignorance, bad faith and vested interests amongst its competing participants, is another question), while less convinced about the second.
One obvious response is that neither question is an either/or - but that doesn't answer either the in-principle question about how to then balance efforts between the two poles of each question, or the practical one of how to contribute to moving the balance of government's and others' focus towards where they best should lie. Also obvious is that there are no easy answers, and at the same time that the recognition of such lack shouldn't be an excuse for diminishing the forcefulness with which any individual/collective/organisation (including, in whatever small way, me) pushes towards what is right, and at the same time again that a constant humility and awareness of the complexity of the terrain is the only ethically responsible course. I think I'll return to this book, because it presents a real and needed basis of tension to force me to examine my own beliefs and assumptions about how 'we' should engage with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people.
Its two major challenges to conventional (white) progressive thinking - and my own - are its arguments that:
- The relative importance of colonisation, genocide and intergenerational trauma to the terrible conditions - in terms of violence, abuse, poor health, overcrowded housing, poverty and suffering (to name just a few) - in many/most contemporary Indigenous communities is typically overstated, and the effects of the interaction between traditional cultural practices and norms (including those which involve sanctioned violence, internal inequality and anti-scientific practices), and the forced imposition of modern technologies, social institutions and conditions (eg fixed housing, with its associated communal and hygiene-related challenges), understated; and
- Too much weight is given to the 'rights' agenda, including campaigning for land rights, constitutional recognition, 'reconciliation' via treaty and other formal mechanisms, and self-determination, at the expense of action - intervention - much more directly targeted at the ill health, violence and other factors causing direct harm to individuals, including a particular focus on child socialisation as a means of breaking the intergenerational cycle.
The way it's written, as well as the depth of experience, knowledge and empathy that Sutton brings, makes it clear that The Politics of Suffering isn't meant as an apologia or Trojan Horse for simplistic conservative attitudes to the topic, and having read it more or less twice all the way through, I'm inclined to be at least open to that first argument (although it makes me very uncomfortable, and what its nuanced acceptance means for the messy, contested realm of public debate and policy-making, with all its ignorance, bad faith and vested interests amongst its competing participants, is another question), while less convinced about the second.
One obvious response is that neither question is an either/or - but that doesn't answer either the in-principle question about how to then balance efforts between the two poles of each question, or the practical one of how to contribute to moving the balance of government's and others' focus towards where they best should lie. Also obvious is that there are no easy answers, and at the same time that the recognition of such lack shouldn't be an excuse for diminishing the forcefulness with which any individual/collective/organisation (including, in whatever small way, me) pushes towards what is right, and at the same time again that a constant humility and awareness of the complexity of the terrain is the only ethically responsible course. I think I'll return to this book, because it presents a real and needed basis of tension to force me to examine my own beliefs and assumptions about how 'we' should engage with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people.
