Racism: the fight isn't over
When One Nation failed to win more than one Senate seat, National Party and other politicians were quick to claim that the racists had been "turned back". The implication is that racism can be defeated simply by keeping extreme racist parties out of parliament.
This is a dangerous viewpoint.
The majority of the parties elected to parliament — the Liberal, National and Labor parties — all advocate and implement racist policies when they are in government.
Because each of the major parties advocates some racist policies towards Aborigines, Torres Strait Islanders and migrants, none of them wanted the issue of racism to be debated during the election campaign.
Avoiding a public discussion about racism meant that the major parties avoided having the spotlight focused on their racist policies. Such scrutiny would have shown up similarities between some of their policies and those of One Nation.
The major parties are struggling to keep people within the standard politics of the big business two-party parliamentary system. This means that they need to appeal to both racists and anti-racists for support during election campaigns.
In order to win the support of anti-racists, representatives of the major parties mouth vague generalities about racial "tolerance", "diversity" and "unity". However, when they are attempting to build support for their own policies, they have no hesitation in using racist stereotyping.
Howard used racist stereotyping to justify cutting Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission funding by more than that of any other government department in the 1996 federal budget. The Keating Labor government used similar tactics.
Now is the time for the anti-racist movement to step up the campaign against racism rather than relax into complacency.
The fact that One Nation received the third largest vote in the elections, and the Coalition parties' success in implementing racist policies indicates the depth of racism in Australia which needs to be challenged.
Howard's election night speech about the need for reconciliation and tolerance is utter hypocrisy; no credence should be given to it. All that reconciliation means to Howard is that the Aborigines, Torres Strait Islanders and migrants should reconcile themselves to the racism that is intrinsic to Australian nationalism.
There can be no genuine reconciliation without justice, and there can be no justice without the reversal of policies which discriminate against Aborigines, Torres Strait Islanders and migrants.
The anti-racist movement of the last few years will not have amounted to much unless it shows itself capable of fighting racist policies, regardless of which party is advocating them.
Because most racist politicians describe themselves as anti-racist while advocating racist policies, there is enormous confusion about what is or is not racist.
This makes it all the more foolish to rely on bureaucratic methods of fighting racism, such as censoring racist views, because that simply drives racist views underground without challenging them.
The only sure-fire way of fighting racism is to build an on-the-streets movement that seeks to explain why racist policies are racist and how racism is used by the rich and powerful as a method of divide and rule, to prevent working people from uniting to fight for our common interests.
There are a number of specific issues which anti-racists need to campaign on immediately: preventing state governments from further restricting Aboriginal access to native title; preventing the federal government from stripping ATSIC of its functions; reinstating the funding that was cut from ATSIC in 1996; reinstating the right of migrants to access welfare; and abolishing policies that oppress or discriminate against asylum-seekers, such as mandatory detention.
Until issues like these are won, anti-racists have no reason to slacken their efforts.