I have been struck for a long time by the Government’s overt PR push for ‘the Anzac Spirit’ to be regarded as the truly ‘iconic’ Australian Spirit and anyone who denies that is just well, Un-Australian.

Well, they would push that image wouldn’t they? Millions of peasants going overseas to fight through the mud, blood, vomit and diarrhoea to preserve the powers of the governing classes back at home who didn’t even send their sons to war. That works rather well for the governing classes – hardly surprising they spruik it. John Howard's attitude to war is a little like his attitude to cricket - he likes to watch.

I however would like to promote another courageous stand as representing our national iconic spirit – the spirit of the Eureka Stockade where ordinary men and women stood against the tyrannical exploitation of the workers by the wealthy and the corruption intrinsic in policing forces whose pay is controlled by the governing classes.

The Eureka Spirit – to me that is a better representation of an iconic Australian Attitude - what do you all think?.

Rob.... the rich not sending their sons to fight is not a new thing.
Read Josephus account of the fall of Jerusalem in ad70, it says the same thing. The rich merchants etc paid poor youths to fight in place of their sons.

Knowing this, its a wonder anyone is willing to fight 'for their country'.

Today, I didn't see much Anzac spirit at the Industrial Relations Protest in Melbourne. But I did see a lot of totally brainwashed zombies who are passionate that John Howard is the reason they have no job security and that conditions accrued by unions pandering to personal greed over a long period of time are being challenged by Employers who have a lot more choice in 'where' they locate their operations compared to the days when these conditions were decided.

There was a lot of symbolism there.. trying to capitalize on the 'Eureka Spirit' but all I saw was a desperate attempt by increasingly irrelevant unions to cling to what little power they have left and are using the Howard IR laws to do this.

I suppose the other side of the Anzac events, was indeed the bravery and self sacrifice of those young men. It matters not that it was in Turkey, the Ottoman empire would have encompassed Australia given the half chance.

"the spirit of the Eureka Stockade where ordinary men and women stood against the tyrannical exploitation of the workers by the wealthy and the corruption intrinsic in policing forces whose pay is controlled by the governing classes"

This is the similar to the "spirit" that the Gurinji knew all to well (albeit much more ancient and grounded in Aboriginal soveriegnty) when they walked off Wave Hill Station.

See this link: http://www.greenleft.org.au/1995/197/11483

While you're at it learn something about Aboriginal slavey (yes it happened here too!) here: http://www.eniar.org/news/pdfs/stolenwagesfacts.pdf

Posted by Rainier, Thursday, 30 November 2006 10:13:06 PM
While you're at it learn something about Aboriginal slavey (yes it happened here too!)

So did white slavery - my ancestor was transported given 6 years hard labour for the crime of 'stealing a gentleman's handkerchief'. The transport of 'convicts' for use in building the new colony was just 'slavery with an excuse'. This is the one issue I find myself returning to a lot when dealing with Aboriginal issues - it is assumed that 'white people' were one tribe but the white people in chains had more in common with the black people in chains that they did with their white overlords.

I will never understand the fuss about Gallipoli, where we had the crap beaten out of us by the Turks.

As for Eureka, well a lot of people from all over the world had the crap beaten out of them, too, by redcoats.

I don't see much sense in making a hoo-ha about either event, Rob.

I'm with you there Leigh. We seem too desperate to find some momentous historical occasion to mark our coming of age.

Gallipoli is supposed to be important because we were blooded, but most seem to think we were dudded.

The only really significant spirit in our history was rum, but that probably wouldn't go down too well in tourism ads.

I agree with Leigh. Anzac was a tragedy for Australia. The Federation was very new we had a small population at the time. It almost killed an entire generation of men. The fact is, however, more British died in Gallipoli than the number of Anzacs did. It was a tragedy for them too.

Also, people forget that ANZAC = Australia AND NZ Army corpse. The spirit of Anzac is the spirit of ANZAC. Australia does not have the sole copyright to that spirit: claiming that this is our national identity and nobody else's. The whole campaign was a slaughter: a needless carnage of young men invading another country that had nothing to do with Australia. Sound familiar? What DID we learn?

As for Boaz, ah, the Ottomans were not fighting to take over Australia. They only fought what they thought were the British Troops conspiring to invade with Russia. They had to defend Turkey. The determined fear was the British alliance with Russia.

I agree that Eureka was not unique as a battle against "the redcoats" and unfair taxes; yet it was significant in the formation of an identity. I wouldn't go as far as say that this was a unique spirit.

To find the Australian spirit, why do boys insist on measuring this on war? You are more likely to find clues in cultural arts, our music and in our film industry. That is, what we have left after the Howard years.

FLETCH... puh-LEASE... I've just come from the gym after a hard workout.. if I have to roll around the floor laughing it will do me serious damage :) grrr...

The Ottomans.. ? good grief. READ this you drongo :)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Vienna

The Ottomans were as greedy for territory as any empire. I have NO sympathy whatsoever for them being attacked on Turkish soil. It would have been good for them to endure a taste of the British lash or the Russian..God knows how hard they tried to do the same to the Russians and Europeans.

I think the ANZAC spirit was born long before the actual event.
You will find it in the prose and poetry of Lawson and Patterson.
Compare "Clancy of the Overflow/Man from snowy river with the Australian Light Horse in Palestine...
There is a great reason to look fondly back on their bravery and heroism.
SO.. with that in mind.. I hope you guys will join the GREAT BIKINI MARCH on Australia day. (Melbourne)
http://thegreataustralianbikinimarch.wikispaces.com/

Posted by saintfletcher, Friday, 1 December 2006 2:54:37 PM
"The whole campaign was a slaughter: a needless carnage of young men invading another country that had nothing to do with Australia. Sound familiar? What DID we learn?"

Exactly the point I made in the OP. What we learn from the glorification of Gallipoli is - we learn to go wherever the government sends us, kill whoever we are told to kill and die for the privilege if required - these are exactly the lessons the government wants us to learn and it is why they push it so hard.

Rob,

Congratulations on building a 'shelf' others may use as a stepping-post to see above the low-life thinking of the 'upper' classes.

The usual supects come out like woodworms to drill their tiny(minded) holes through it while building nothing useful themselves.

I repeat my comment on a different post that the greatest conspiracy known to mankind is the one the rich use to convince the vastly more numerous poor that they are 'weak' (cannonfodder for their wars).

The commonality of Anzac and Eureka spirits was the determination and strength of the 'lower classes' rising to fight for what they believed. While Anzac soldiers were fooled into fighting an irrelevant war (to them) under the direction and command of half-witted British generals, it was their Spirit, not the command structure of the 'superior' officer classes, that caused Turks to respect their bravery and ability, even under sub-human conditions of mass-slaughter and hopelessness.

As the first time United Australia sent it's troops to war it exemplifies better than any the formation of a National fighting spirit, albeit we lost the battle, and is as good an object for rememberance and rallying around as is our Union Jack-inspired 'Aussie' Flag many have fought and died 'for'.

I'm always happy to defend freedom fighters of an invaded country for what they are and not terrorists as GW likes to call them, but i think you got the Ottoman's quite wrong.

The Ottomans, exactly like Boaz_D and Bush and Bonsai (little bush) are only ever happy when the whole world is under their domination and we all are made to think exactly alike ('cos that is so gonna happen ever!)

Because, just like the rich and their occupation of the poor, they have so much to lose and are mortally afraid of doing just that if they let someone else take over (overtake) them.

As always, many will fall for it and divide 'our' true strength we could use against them (just like the rich depend upon, and help manipulate in their conspiracy) to keep us under their control ('divide and conquer' is HOW old?)

Leigh,

Really..a 'fuss' you say?

well I think the men and women who went to war for us, ie: you ,....are deserving and very worthy of discussion in any context.

If I may be so bold exactly what is it you find so unworthy that they dont merit a discussion and any recognition?

The Anzacs for whats its worth faced a death defying feat there in the trenches in Gallipolli and for the life of me why you would be so callous and dismiissive of that, says more about you than maybe youi cared to reveal.?

But your veiws on any thread these days leaves me wondering why you bother to post at all.very negative on your behalf.

Gee Leigh - I thought i was the only one who sees you for what you are?? Perhaps before you die you might learn how to be constructive instead of destructive of other people with moral intent?

Or is that asking too much I wonder?

I agree with saint fletcher. ANZAC does mean Australia - and - New Zealand army corps. As far as many Australians are concerned, it was the day when these two young nations had their first real baptism of fire in the first world war and really started maturing from then on, followed by the Somme, the following year, to mention other gruesome places, followed by WW2, and I think you get my drift.

The EUREKA STOCKADE What the Eureka Stockade was all about in BRIEF is in a DEMORACHY the people RULE The government of the day were BULLYING the People and they objected and they were charged by the authorities and placed before a JURY (their peers) and their peers (THE REAL LAW OF A DEMOROCHY)found that they had not broken the law

THIS IS ABOUT TRUE DEMOROCHY WHERE THE PEOPLE RULE NOT THE GOVERNMENT
TRIAL BY JURY IS DEMORACHY
TAKE AWAY TRIAL BY JURY AND YOU HAVE A DICTATORSHIP

I was under the impression that 'Australia' sent troops to the Boer War which continued after Federation and so WW1 was not our first military campaign as a nation.

I do accept the enormity of the sacrifice of the 61,521 Australian men and 199 Australian women who died in WW1, but I feel it must be acknowledged that, although the worst of times often brings out the best in people, they are still the worst of times. So while the people should be honoured the event should not be glorified.

Rob51....
Wikipedia states:
'Boer War 1899–1902
Before Federation of Australia and the forming of the national army, the six Australian colonial governments sent contingents to serve in the Second Boer War. These soldiers were paid by the British government and as such were technically part of the British Army.

The first detachment, in October 1899, was known as The Australian Regiment, mainly volunteers from the Colonies of Victoria, Tasmania, South Australia and Western Australia. The way the war developed, these troops were converted from infantry to mounted infantry.

Strong resistance from the Afrikaner forces led to further recruiting in the Australian colonies. Known as Bushmen's Contingents, these soldiers were usually volunteers with horse-riding and shooting skills but no military experience. After Federation in 1901, eight Australian Commonwealth Horse battalions were sent.

Many of the Australian units were short-lived and subject to frequent restructuring. Some Australians were transferred to multinational units, such as the Bushveldt Carbineers, famed as the unit in which "Breaker" Morant and Peter Hancock served, before their court martial and execution for alleged war crimes.

Australian units served at many notable actions, including Sunnyside, Slingersfontein, Relief of Kimberley, Paardeburg and Rhenosterkop . 16,175 Australians, with 16,314 horses, served in the Boer War; 251 were K.I.A., 267 died of disease and 43 went M.I.A. Five VC's were awarded to Australians.'

So as a technicality 'Australia' did send troops into action before WW1, but with few incidents worthy of being described as heroic and some worthy of the name 'war-crimes' i can't see justification for using it as a symbol for National Pride as the Anzac legend has established for the country and New Zealand.

Since 'Australians' were in the war before Federation and the formation of the Australian Army, WW1 was the first time Australia sent troops to war Uniquely as a nation than as a colony(s) of Britain.

I agree. I see no glory in War. My points were more to silence Negative Ne-Leigh and to show that it's Australian people's spirit combating oppression that is worthy of icon status for Aussies, be it at Eureka OR Turkey.