Part Three
The Duty of Care, Climate Change, the Unions
The multi layered reality, Fake News, Complexities; how a single phenomenon has multiple interpretations.
That contemporary corporate thinking and its processes are still grounded in Colonialism, while its language still demonstrates the arrogance of Imperialism, has been highlighted by Rio Tinto’s destruction of the 46,000-year-old caves at Juukan Gorge near the Brockman iron ore mine in the Pilbara region in Western Australia. An event that occurred ironically at the beginning of the 2020 National Reconciliation Week.
It was notable that Rio Tinto had already removed important objects from these sacred ancestral places and, later, were to admit to storing them in isolation in shipping containers on Rio Tinto mining lease areas in much the same way that Imperial England had pillaged the world for treasure and antiquities during the 17th, 18th and 19th Centuries. The company, to date, merely apologised for the sacrilege and its associated misappropriation of the artifacts, while the language used doubled down by speaking of these practices as, “rescue” even though the company was blatantly contravening globally acknowledged cultural heritage standards, especially the agreed human rights standards in relation to the cultural heritage of Indigenous peoples, their rights to practice their culture, to control their heritage and the right to free, prior and informed consent in relation to matters affecting them” [x]. That the governments of West Australia and the Federal Government admitted they had been forewarned that Rio Tinto was planning to act in this way further demonstrates how incompetence and the pragmatism at the heart of governance opens the door to unethical behaviour and greed. It is heartrendingly true that Rio Tinto broke no legal strictures, simply because outdated and ineffective legislation that was no longer fit for purpose had been allowed to languish on the parliamentary table for years. Rio Tinto’s dismissal of their Duty of Care with an offhand apology can be utilised here to demonstrate how a multi layered reality can be created within neoliberalism and how such ‘realities’ can be utilised to both abuse and silence social expectations.
An important aspect here is the local Indigenous people, the Puutu Kunti Kurrama and Pinikura people (PKKP), were prevented from speaking out against the destruction due to gag-clauses in their agreement with Rio Tinto. And it is this aspect, when taken further, demonstrates how the corporatist weaponisation of governance and courts of law also act to silence criticism of breaches of social responsibilities, bullying of local communities and theft. The other side of this coin is represented by the activities of Corporate lobbyists within the inquiry and law reform processes who also operate ‘under the radar’ of transparent governance.
However, Technocracy, as an artifact of American culture, appears along with the advancement of the techno-consumer society of the mid1900s. Technocracy today incorporates an ideology and language that feeds the apprehension that its increasing influence of Right-Wing media outlets has resulted in elements of its ideology being aligned with the politics of Donald Trump. Even though technocracy itself is contradictory to the value of independence and self-reliance. Because it clashes with the ideals of equality and fails as a cultural concept that protects the individual or gives citizens the possibility of participating in the management of their own destiny. Its attraction to and grounding in Corporatism can be clearly discerned within its stated ideological aim to “overcome poverty by the maximization of profits without concern or consideration for the environment”. An ideology which does appear to mirror the past few years of the Trump government or our coverage of the Rio Tinto scandal[xi].
I do admit I am unsure whether Corporatism gave birth to Technocracy, or as separate ideologies, they became blended within neoliberalism. However, a deconstruction of contemporary Corporatised language should demonstrate how these ideologies create a dogma that proclaims the abilities of science and technology together will improve the economic imperative simply by silencing of the messy remnants of Democratic Socialism. This argument can now draw upon the way that technocracy has allowed corporations and governance, via the lenses of the mass media, to shape public opinion, spread popular political bias or agendas on a global basis and to re-engineer social values pertaining to the Worker. However, the problem faced by today’s technocrats is that when the theory of a multi layered reality is applied it can be argued that the ‘mass media’ only exists as a myth, for in the US alone, “the mass media are no longer owned and controlled by individual companies. Today, large corporations own the largest papers, networks, and stations"[xii]. So, this increasing domination of the mass media by so few corporations now feeds a belief that media companies are ignoring the interests of their audiences in order to force editorial decisions, based within a narrow, politicised and profit driven narrative, to serve shareholders and support ideology rather than inform, articulate or educate the broader public of views and news.
However, this observation also raises yet another cause for concern in that as the mass media is dominated by so few large monopolies that, while not actually making government legislation, the lack of transparency between governance and mass media makes dissent practically impossible for unpopular viewpoints to be heard. For those social commentators who turn to social media, they run the risk of their personal viewpoints being branded as politically motivated ‘fake news’ or manufactured dissent thus opening themselves to trolling or legal action. For example, a multi layered reality can be discerned in mythology, when the 11th Century, King Canute having had his throne taken to a tidal zone demonstrated to his courtiers, by sitting in the advancing tide, that a regent’s secular powers had no control over the elements or the ‘supreme power of God’. As this reading did not convey the belief system that supported the ‘power of office’ proverbial readings, by misattribute, were to reverse the narrative which then related how the King’s hubris was the motivation in his ‘attempt to stop the tide’, rather than his attempt to teach humility. Such hubris within a belief system shows that ideologically, having unconsciously dismissed such apocrypha as ‘fake news’, contemporary political power or office are still susceptible to the illusion that it is they that control events or the stories that spring from them. But we shall return to this point shortly. In the meantime, this idea that humans are masters of the world, in that what they see or yearn they can own or control or that somehow Humankind was central to God’s plan can be simply read that whether, “man’s dominion was guaranteed by the Bible or by science, the result was the same – the natural world was his to exploit”[xiii] a hubris, already explored as an irony brought about by prejudice.
While such prejudices were centred on ‘obstacles to development’, as the hubris was aimed at bringing societies that had for centuries orientated their lives towards self-sufficiency, sustainability and long-term management of resources into the mainstream. Such beliefs were to feed an irony that flowed deep within a ‘tribalism’ where under the banners of ‘development’ and ‘moral imperatives’ gathered a sedentary people who, while envying the freedom and political independence of the poor, often nomadic peoples and their way of life, were to bring such people or folk “under increasing pressure to abandon practices that have served them well since time immemorial”[xiv]. I must now explain that from here I use the term Folk Media as a metaphor in an attempt to capture the spirit of the ancient substance that was to give birth to the modern voice that “dwells in the heart of every author whose belly is at odds with his principles”[xv]. The reason for the metaphor is that ‘Folk’, as a terminological heirloom, carries “unfortunate assumptions in its semantic baggage” such as rusticity or cultural stratification and other “unhappy associations the term ‘folk’ has carried”[xvi]. This observation continues in that, “there has … been a tendency, as a result of this ideological construct, to ignore or distort the actual intra-community conflict, the instances of competitive, self-mirrored individualism, the realities of acculturation, the dynamic of class cultural relations, the assimilation and transformation from ‘below’ of elements of the elite culture, and vice versa”[xvii].
This reading leads to an observation that our modern conception of 'fake news' could be seen to have its’ roots in the last decade or so of the 17th Century when the publication and pamphleteering of London’s Grub Street prompted this proclamation by King Charles II in May of 1680:
Whereas it is of great importance to the state, that all news printed and published to the people, as well concerning foreign as domestic affairs, should be agreeable to truth, or at least warranted by good intelligence, that the minds of his Majesty’s subjects may not be disturbed, or amused by lies or vain reports, which are many times raised on purpose to scandalize the government, or for other indirect ends: and whereas of late many evil-disposed persons have made it a common practice to print and publish of news without license or authority, and therein have vended to his Majesty’s people all the idle and malicious reports they could collect or invent, contrary to law; the continuance whereof could in a short time endanger the peace of the kingdom, the same manifestly tending thereto, as has been declared by all his Majesty’s judges unanimously. His Majesty, therefore, considering the great mischief that may ensue upon such licentious and illegal practices, if not timely prevented, has thought fit by this his Royal Proclamation (with the advice of his Privy Council) strictly to prohibit and forbid all persons whatsoever to print or publish any news-books or pamphlets of news not licensed by his Majesty’s authority”. (Quoted in Pinkus p.236)
Pinkus[xviii] went on to note, in all apparent seriousness, this proclamation did “check the newspapers for several months”. However, what made Grub Street notable was that its ‘hack’ writers and their publishers “were not well liked” for although they were entertaining, their lives were still contemptable as they wrote for bread and their “Bacchanalian dreams”. He does note that although these writers were poor and lived wretched lives these authors and publishers were, “just as learned, intelligent and witty as the best of their present-day counterparts” and it was this self-independence that gave them the “moral assurance … to sneer at patron seekers”. As an example, although such as Daniel Defoe did not quite qualify as a “Grub Street hack” his tactics had the Grub Street flair which were notable in his ‘The True Born Englishman’:
Thus from a mixture of all kinds began,
That heterogeneous thing, an Englishman:
In eager rapes, and furious lust begot,
Between a painted Briton and a Scot.
Whose gendering offspring quickly learned to bow,
And yoke their heifers to the Roman Plough:
From whence a mongrel half-breed race there came,
With neither name, nor nation, speech or fame.
In whose hot veins new mixtures quickly ran,
Infused betwixt a Saxon and a Dane:
While their rank daughters, to their parents just,
Received all nations with promiscuous lust.
This nauseous brood did contain,
The well-extracted blood of Englishmen.
(Quoted in Pinkus 1968 p.238)
Although this satire, attacking the pretension that Englishmen were ‘True Borne’ became one of Defoe’s most popular pamphlets, it was to also inspire and arouse a great deal of opposition and diatribe. However, the controversy of ‘True Borne’ was muted compared to Defoe’s next pamphlet The Shortest Way with the Dissenters (1702) which, as an ironic discreditation of the Church, was to lead him ultimately to the Newgate Prison and thence to the Old Bailey charged with “writing and publishing a seditious article”. In his defence Defoe wrote his Hymn to the Pillory and at the pillory itself, “the Dissenters of London swarmed around Defoe, hailed him as their champion and pelted him with flowers”[xix].
So the stories, writings and pamphlets continued to flow from the pens and presses of Grubb Street to make ever louder the voices of the poets and artists whose works alluded to portray a range of basic human ideals that would stand to transcend the pragmatic reasoning and logical thinking of the Industrial Revolution. Later Wordsworth’s ‘impulses of deeper birth’ were thus to be a poet’s vision of this consciousness of the values and spiritual forces which drive and command the Human condition to stand against the drabness and degradation of Industry and its diminishment of the human spirit. Through the words of the Pastoralists (Romantics) and into the Modern Era it was to become ever more evident that although Technology was to provide some of the tools that advanced Mankind, it could never advance the Human Condition. But why is this so? I would argue the poets tell us clearly that Man should never compromise human Ideals on the anvil of Technology, simply because technology does not and arguably, never should contain a Life force. Here I could remind you to think of Mary Shelley and her Monster, alongside that of a reading that warns of the 'nature' of man-made life or the social engineering experiments such as eugenics that proposes the ‘science’ that Man can recreate Man in man’s image.
So, it is this observation that holds the irony that while there can be no doubt that Industry advanced globalisation, we are still as was Wordsworth, arguing at what cost? So now, as I seek to expand the traditionally narrow definition of folk media that has its’ arts originating purely, and some would argue innocently, within the culture of a particular people or folk. This task will necessitate the exploration of a number of subjects and forms, of which many will defy classification as this fascinating and blended world of art, voice and even psychosis unfolds into the future. It is also important to remember that the arts encompassed within folk media are not only the quaint relics of an ancient people, but that they also represent the active and highly functional cultural institutions that still perform functions vital to the wellbeing of localised communities today. In modern times we have the various expressions of Banksy’s works, the Yellow Shirt protestors, #BLM and even the words and wisdom of Greta Thunberg to draw from. Their media speaks not only to their communities since their art and voices also possess abilities that introduce people from very diverse backgrounds into a form of companionship. From the streets people are drawn into a sense of Place and then inspired to define and express their learning environments through folk media. So, we now need to ask, is folk media already opposing the politicised silencing and dissention that hampers connections to another crisis facing the world, that of Climate Change?
As already evident in the works of Banksy and Thunberg a form of global folk media has already become increasingly evident in the new and developing paradigms being applied to the mitigation of the damages being perpetrated on our environments. I would now like us to examine very closely how folk media today communicates the existent values of social capital. And then how these paradigms can be applied to the raising of consciousness on how Climate Change is being mediatised and costed within the mass and social medias. Historically, impacts of development were measurable by their probable effect on the ecological environment, so water, land use and economic benefits that would flow from such development were prioritised. As already noted such measurements were both Colonial and Imperialist in their paradigms for any bias was always obligated towards the economic imperative. However, the ‘social voice’ within communities has become much louder in contemporary times and folk media can now demonstrate how an economic bias returns a flawed measurement. If we now apply folk media we can see how this economic bias traditionally fails to recognise how developments will actually pervert, corrupt or divert a locality’s social capital and silence the critique of local communities .
As an example, the proposed Wallarah 2 underground coal mine being developed a mere four kilometres from the centre of Wyong on the Central Coast of New South Wales can be argued as showing that insufficient attention is being paid to the impact that mining would have on the heritage and social resources in the mine’s shadow. It should be noted that the Wallarah 2 mine is set to operate for a period of at least 28 years and while Wyong Coal claims that the impact of the mine on the area will be temporary, I will argue that the impacts on the archaeological sites, places of intangible significance and the wider aesthetics and ambience of the Central Coast will be permanent and irreversible. The auxiliary effects of mining, the increased use of scarce rail resources, increased traffic, dust, noise, ventilation shafts and tailing dumps are all likely to have far-reaching effects on the physical environment. But while these have been addressed and costed within the existing paradigm of the ideological economic imperative, the broader social and communal environments which include a degradation of the sense of Place, the loss of social identity due to the changing of the social usage of the land and a marked diminishment of the aesthetic values pertaining to the Central Coast as a Place of scenic beauty, tranquillity and connectedness are being ignored by the Planning Authorities.
This observation thus requires that the consequences of such social and communal degradation should be addressed within a Social rather than by an economic paradigm. This is because the development of this mine will have a devastating impact on the attractiveness of the Central Coast as a place to live, a place where an individual can become as one with the local community or where people can enjoy the natural attractions of an elite tourism destination. The auxiliary effects of mining, the increased use of scarce rail resources, increased traffic, dust, noise, ventilation shafts and tailing dumps are all likely to have far-reaching effects on the physical environment. Therefore, the negative consequences on existing and foreshadowed urban communities, the denigration of the Central Coast’s eco-tourism and heritage sectors, the changed usage, the hallmarks of heavy industry and the loss of connectivity will, without doubt, change forever the existing social system which today defines the Central Coast. I will also demonstrate that as there has been so much politicised talk and debate over the environmental and economic consequences of living in the shadow of mining in Australia it is mainly the fear of economic loss that serves to swamp the voices that try to relate the importance of the social justice issues. So, while these issues are manifold, being that they relate directly to each and every individual and child that will be forced to live in the shadow of mining. It is sobering to reflect that the people who live in the shadow of the proposed Wallarah 2 mine today, number more than 336,600 people. However, this number is expected to increase within the life of the mine to a predicted 431,850[xx]. Therefore, although later in our conversation I will draw parallels between this proposed mine and the effects extraction industries are having on urban communities globally I would draw your attention at this time to the italics which define the binaries within this narrative.
A NSW Tourism website describes the Central Coast as, “abundance of seaside, sporting, recreational, family, holiday and natural attractions, [which] makes the Central Coast one of Australia's leading holiday destinations. It's become a rapidly developing urban region on the coastline north of Sydney and south of Lake Macquarie and Newcastle” (my brackets). While this description serves to encapsulate the mosaic that makes the Central Coast such a unique and inviting place, it also draws attention to a legacy that has been created and revered by the generations of folk whom have made the Central Coast their home or, as in so many cases, their second home.
It is notable that because of this internalisation of Place there now exists an imperative that before any major developmental changes are made to the Central Coast it should be critical that the voice of the people who actually live on the Central Coast be heard since this is the voice that represents the universal appreciation of what the Central Coast today means to NSW. And hence, it is this appreciation that we must now speak of for it lies at the very heart of the ambience that has welcomed generations of people to the Central Coast. But why is Ambience so important? Basically, Ambience underpins an initial impression and because social expectations demand good, lasting impressions, ambience not only acts to inform people it also provides the basis for emotional attachments to grow. The impressions that people gain about the Central Coast through its ambience thus become the crucial beliefs that underpin the many emotional and social understandings of what the ‘Central Coast’ means to them as individuals.
The difficulty that communities have with ambience is that as a shared social construct it is difficult, if not impossible, to create or recreate due, in part, to the multiplicity and diversity of its functions. Given that the ambience of the Central Coast is the product of its social environment, social history and social expectations it is, unquestionably, the most potent influencer on the narrative that represents what the Central Coast provides. So, we speak here of the aesthetics of the Central Coast. Although it is best known for its beaches and natural attractions, the Central Coast today encompasses a network of sites with evidence of occupation by humans spanning more than 40,000 years. There is evidence abounding on the Central Coast that marks the interaction between numerous kinds of peoples, with the area being also rich in biological diversity. However, I would argue that such evidence also marks the fragility that human exploitation brings with it. For it is this fragility and the tensions raised by it, that demonstrate that from its earliest years, Australian governance has struggled when it has tried to balance the many demands of the ‘Economic Imperative’ at the heart of ‘Corporate’ developments against those of ‘Communal’ development. It becomes clear therefore, that this noisy debate over Wealth Creation and the resulting socio-economic costs to our physical and social environments which have galvanised and divided our nation since the 1800s continue unabated. It is also notable that, as we have already discerned, it was this debate and the language it developed that led to the continuing attempt to write the original inhabitants and owners of this country from the pages of history. As can be clearly demonstrated, it is still unfortunately evident, that the mining industry and many consecutive Governments still fail to draw salutary lessons from history that define the fact that mining and other extraction industries are literally ill advised attempts to impose an 18th Century Colonialist ideology onto a 21st Century world.
Demonstrating the rhetoric of corporatisation, Wyong Coal, a subsidiary of Korea Resource Corporation (KORES), proclaims that, “this project is set to provide extensive economic and social benefits to Wyong, the wider Central Coast Region and NSW communities through job creation and business opportunities” there is however no mention of how this mine will benefit the raising of social capital.[xxi] Underpinning this statement of intention is a targeted granting of so called philanthropic gestures and promises to the people of the Central Coast with a centrepiece that comprises a Draft Voluntary Planning Agreement (VPA) between Wyong Council and Wyong Coal Pty Ltd, which promises almost $20million in public benefits, if the NSW Government approves Wallarah 2[xxii]. I would argue that today it is this ‘philanthropy’ that corrupts and diverts the raising of social capital as it is designed to effectively silence the Central Coast communities as it argues that Wyong is a stand alone community when in fact it represents a region that encompasses a number of very diverse communities. This argument is supported by the recent establishment of the Central Coast Council which represents an area of 1,681sqr kms with numerous towns and districts joining together to network the region. It is this networking which shows how the Central Coast communities created a depth of social capital that is based mainly within the aesthetics provided by a rich and diverse heritage which today augment a number of other assets which are both environmentally and socially derived.
However, the natural growth of the region and its expected expansion has already created some communal concern as rising rates, transportation costs, teenage unemployment and the capping of government funding of health and education have all taken their toll. The need for the raising of more social capital has been accepted by the NSW Government in its formation of the Central Coast Council for it did so to broaden the council’s footprint to improve its diversity and range. That social capital is crucial to a region is explained by the World Bank. “Social capital refers to the institutions, relationships, and norms that shape the quality and quantity of a society's social interactions. Increasing evidence shows that social cohesion is critical for societies to prosper economically and for development to be sustainable. Social capital is not just the sum of the institutions which underpin a society – it is the glue that holds them together”[xxiii]. Here, while I am able to argue that the actions of Wyong Coal Pty Ltd, the mining industry as a whole and apparently politicians from all sides of governance are, by their rhetoric, processes and procrastination, creating a weakening of social cohesion putting ever more pressure on the raising of social capital. As our previous discussion and the history books tell us the mining industry and its governance continue to refuse to address their global record of corruption and deceits. As the recent activities by Rio Tinto, Santos and Wyong Coal demonstrate this taint of corruption and power broking has destroyed public confidence in governance and has diverted the social cohesion so necessary for the raising of social capital.
So, while the extraction industries continue to ignore demands for social justice and transparency this corporate corruption shows how protests calling for improved environment protection or social democracy face thinly veiled Realpolitik programs of division and social manipulation. Such bullying is being assisted by a governance that cynically targets environmental and social institutions with a bureaucratic militancy supported by police, propaganda and a constantly outraged mass media. While this, at best, shows a total lack of respect for any existing social or physical environments it can also be read as being a corrupting practice aiming at destabilising the existing social order so that another may be imposed in its place. This being a practice that continued unabated since Colonial times. Political theorist, W.W. Rostow (1990) observed that in history more, so called, developed countries used this destabilizing process to spread their ideology into communities on a global scale: “These invasions – literal or figuratively – shocked the traditional society and began or hastened its undoing; but they also set in motion ideas and sentiments which mitigated the process by which a modern alternative to the traditional society was constructed out of the old culture.”[xxiv] Rostow here demonstrates how the Corporatisation of an 18th century Imperialist ideology came to actually condone that a society could be destroyed so that another could be ‘developed’. However, what is also portrayed here is the dogma within the economic imperative which is, “economic progress is a necessary condition for some other purpose” and so it can be argued at this point that we should be able to draw some clear comparisons between Rostow’s theory and the perversions and corruptions within contemporary governance.
Here while Wyong Coal Pty Ltd promises to, “provide extensive economic and social benefits to Wyong, the wider Central Coast Region and NSW communities through job creation and business opportunities” their words and actions will remain empty since their rhetoric fails to recognise that the raising of social capital on the Central Coast is far more than just the economic returns from jobs and business opportunities. That governance continually fails to identify or address this corruption of social expectations was made clear as successive NSW Governments vacillated over the development of this mine and why th