In the October 13 edition of P&I, George Browning gave substantial, comprehensive analysis as to why Coalition leader Peter Dutton is ‘dishonest, self deluding and dangerous.’ That appraisal is so important that I do not want to let it rest, not least because there are Australians who support the Dutton viciousness; and his colleagues like to repeat the claim that Australia holds the same values as the Israeli government. A government which is intent on slaughter in Lebanon and in Gaza, and continues its passion for destruction, murder, torture and famine.
Let’s start by considering why Dutton, devoid of empathy and compassion, should also be labelled vicious. The body language of a humourless unsmiling contestant is coupled to the man’s love of the word ‘condemn.’ The Prime Minister, he says, should be condemned for supporting a ceasefire in Gaza and Lebanon, whereas Dutton the strongman supports an Israeli government intent on displaying strength via a continuation of end of time brutalities.
To condemn is to offer no alternatives, to shackle freedom of thought, to end a way of living and perhaps a life, to deny any consideration of human rights and humanity.
Dutton’s taste for condemning, for displaying the dogma of his divisive views, has a long record.
Under his orders, the Sri Lankan Murugappan family were locked up, without proper medical care, the children denied early education.
To show his taste for ultra negativity, he refused to support the 2008 apology to the Stolen Generations, and in 2023, used the same tactics to ensure defeat for the referendum on an Australian Indigenous Voice to parliament.
His latest concern with divisiveness as a means of political gain is evident in his opposition to a government motion which had the potential to bring parties together in recall of the Hamas killings of October last year, the subsequent massive loss of life in Gaza and world wide calls for a ceasefire in Lebanon, Gaza, and the West Bank.
This so called leader opposed a motion calling for peace. With characteristic insight, Cathy Wilcox the cartoonist for the Sydney Morning Herald depicted Dutton declaring the sight of a peace dove ‘divisive.’
In response to Dutton labelling hapless refugees from Gaza as potential terrorists, MP Zali Steggall was asked to withdraw her accusation the opposition leader was racist. As if to confirm the veracity of Steggall’s judgement, Dutton declared that anyone coming from Gaza was ‘nothing but a security threat.’ No understanding, no humanity, only a preoccupation with ingratiating himself and his party with a brutal, extremist regime in Israel.
In parliament he remains proud to condemn, to reject, to admire war, his regular ‘no’, ‘no’, comes with swagger in the body language of the overbearing bully boy.
Dutton could not sustain this stance if members of the Coalition ever dared to question the cruelty inherent in their party’s policies, yet compliance with ugly leadership appears solid. Even those whom a conservative media might call respectable, joined Dutton in opposing a ceasefire in Gaza and Lebanon. Liberal MP Julian Leeser argued, ‘We can’t have a ceasefire at the moment because that would allow terrorist organisations that we list as terrorist in our own country to regroup and reform and continue to attack innocent civilians.’
What does he understand by ‘terrorism’? Who decides what is terrorism and who is a terrorist? Assume Leeser refers to Hamas killings in October 2023 but of course there’s never an admission of decades of Israeli ethnic cleansing and the slaughter of tens of thousands of Palestinians. Perhaps to Leeser, an alleged anti-Semitism is the only or the priority prejudice, so the deaths of Palestinians and Lebanese are of little consequence? Or, if he and his colleagues were ever sufficiently honest to think back to 1948, they would not discard a history which reveals unpalatable truths.
To bolster compliance with Dutton’s opposition to a ceasefire, his apprentice Senator Paterson appeared on the ABC Insiders’ programme on Sunday.
In contorted but slippery argument Paterson resurrected not the good v. bad, civilised v. uncivilised divisiveness so popular with Netanyahu and Dutton, but an almost unfathomable picture of left v. right politics, President Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris were left wing politicians, hence Prime Minister Albanese supporting a ceasefire. By implication former President Trump and Liberal leader Dutton were right wing, hence the civilising benefits of continuing the eradication of undesirables,
Forget the straight faced, mind boggling argument. Compliance with party loyalty, even when it requires cruelty, does not matter if the leader says so.
The Dutton pose means that Australian citizens have as their alternative Prime Minister someone who gives Trumpist, Netanyahu like prescriptions for saving a privileged world.
Arrayed against Dutton is advocacy for people fleeing Gaza, for other refugees, plus a pleading for peace, for respect for international humanitarian law, even for a common humanity. But in a humourless, fear promoting politics, such advocacy is labelled extreme. When you deal with bullies, unless you draw a line in the sand, the Duttons of this world remain threatening and dangerous.
Stuart Rees AM is Professor Emeritus at the University of Sydney & recipient of the Jerusalem (Al Quds) Peace Prize.