While there's quite a bit of merit in John Passant's analysis, his dependence on a Marxian framework will unfortunately mean that it will be devalued for that reason rather than the substance of his argument. Also, the Anzac mythology is so entrenched now in Australian national identity that, even if his perspective isn't rejected because of its ideological slant, it would be regarded as heretical by most Australians.

I think that Anzac Day is indeed the central ritual in Australia's secular religion of nationalism, which for us involves being an Anglo-Celtic bastion in the Antipodes, whose governments have always prostrated themselves before those more powerful Western nations upon whom we depend for national security. Yes, there is much to be proud of in the Anzac tradition, but ultimately I see it as a cultural rationalisation of our dependent status.

As for this -

<< You seem to be locked into not only an ideological dogmatic time warp that has been passed over by history, but a mindset very similar to a Jehovah's Witness (or a Mormon or Muslim) at one's door.

<snip>

...people here do have brains.. please don't insult them. >>

Pot, meet kettle - except Boazy's "ideological dogmatic time warp" is far more similar to that JWs, Mormons and Muslims than Marxism ever will be.

Also, Boazy's reference to Larundel is rather hypocritical, given his offended bleating when some of our more extreme Christian nutters are referred to as certifiable frootloops.

Timely and bravely written article, John. It's not easy to swim against the tide as you have here!

I particularly applaud the following:

"… rather than questioning why war occurred and why workers died for profits."

"Anzac day downplays that horror and makes war acceptable. It is propaganda to allow the ruling class to call on the next generation of workers to join the war effort if needed."

I have sat through many Anzac Day services in schools over the years and, whilst many are very well put together and very moving, I have lamented every time the absence of any reference to the horror and stupidity of war. Quite correctly there is an honouring of fallen soldiers, but the overall context is invariably one of glorification rather than abhorrence of war.

I’ve felt conflicting emotions on Anzac Day for a long time now. With each passing year I too can see myself moving towards Marilyn’s hatred of the day and all it stands for.

CJ Morgan

“While there's quite a bit of merit in John Passant's analysis, his dependence on a Marxian framework will unfortunately mean that it will be devalued for that reason rather than the substance of his argument.”

Being critical of Western imperialism and the excesses of capitalism and framing arguments in terms of class struggle and worker solidarity doesn’t necessarily imply a “dependence on a Marxist framework”.

I agree John’s work will be devalued as a result of that link being made but in my opinion your comments just gave those critics an unwarranted free kick!

BOAZ_David

You can talk of an ideological time warp all you like but views like John’s will gain ascendancy in time. The failings of modern day capitalism are becoming increasingly evident and will eventually bring us all to a point where a major revision of the current economic order is a necessity.

The dependency on endless growth is already meeting its environmental limits. Workers at the bottom of the heap will one day resist the ever-downward pressure on their wages. Millions of subsistence farmers driven from their land will eventually reach a tipping point that will create a wave rather than the current unfelt ripple. The weaknesses in the Wall St deck of cards are already showing and printing more money will only bail us out for so long. Yes, BD one day we’ll look back on these days and wonder why we allowed ourselves to remain locked in this self-destructing time warp for as long as we did.

I agree with CJ, to see you likening John’s mindset to that of “a Jehovah's Witness (or a Mormon or Muslim) at one's door” was the absolute height of hypocrisy. This coming from a poster who never ceases to knock on all our doors with his hateful religious ranting irrespective of how off-topic it invariably is.

We might have found ourselves on the same side of the argument on a recent thread BD, but for very different reasons. Your mindset and mine are poles apart and always will be.

David,

The facts concerning Brendan Nelson's comments and John Simpson Kirkpatrick have been widely reported. e.g.,

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2005/08/26/woz26.xml

You will find more detail in Peter Cochrane's book "Simpson and the Donkey the Making of a Legend" (Melbourne University Press, 1992). He was a supporter of the anarcho-socialist IWW and in a letter to his parents advocated a revolution to overthrow the rule of "Millionaires and lords and Dukes".

As I have said on the other thread:

I will leave it to the survivors of war who will march tomorrow to decide for themselves whether the day has relevance. It is their business.

Hatred of ANZAC day?- this is a democratic opinion, but it shocks the bloody hell out of me.

Thanks BOAZ_David.

I think the time for a democratic society run by those of us who produce the wealth, where production (eg food production) occurs to satisfy human need, has historically arrived.

I note you rebut none of the arguments about Anzac day. This is unfortunate since counter arguments can be made, but most mainstream analysis is actually just prowar propaganda.

But I do agree with you about one thing - a ruling class in Russia around Stalin did arise. This was because the revolution failed to spread in Europe (although it was a close run thing with revolutions breaking out across many European countries, including one in Germany which ended the war.) A revolution in more advanced capitalist countries could then have supplied the basis for moving Russia from its backwardness and at the same time seen the democratic institutions of the state like the workers councils continue. On top of that the West sent 14 armies to help the Whites overthrow the Bolshevik Government.

The seeds for the future can be seen in that first workers Government - workers councils, with automatic rights of instant recall if the workers disagreed with their representative, (something we could perhaps think about for our elected President), withdrawing from imperialist war,and of course the idea of production to satisfy human need, something the backwardness of Russia, its de-classification because of the Civil War and the failure of the revolution to spread, made a dream. Stalin's development of the idea of socialism in one country was the exact opposite of these ideas,and represented not the logical extension of the revolution but its defeat. Sandra Bloodworth has just published a book on this called something like When Workers took power: Russia 1917 and puts the arguments in more rounded and sophisticated ways.

The class conflict going on all over Europe that broke out during and after the war makes Marxism a helpful tool to understanding what was happening, and I think that includes understanding the rise of national myths like Anzac day (or more generally Bastille day, or Independence day and so on.)