1. Do you think Protest remains a valid form of self-expression?

Absolutely. In fact I think it is considered valid for increasing numbers of people who may not see themselves as political, yet feel disenfranchised and disillusioned with the current state of representative politics. The recent protests against war in Iraq showed this. We all remember the news reports featuring normally civilised grandmas who were marching in their first ever protest, etc. But that’s a symptom of what I’d also say, which is that when protest is rendered palatable by mainstream media it may be a sign that it won’t achieve much.

I think there’s a danger in protest being simply a form of self-expression, without any will to risk that self in the service of a professed cause. I also think we need to recognise that protest is an important part of how a system like capitalism reproduces itself and a principle like free speech is defended. For the former, the music industry is the leading example: we’ve just seen Eminem’s new film clip released, which clearly advocates protest. But just like Korn’s “Y’all Want A Single” video before that, it’s going to translate to mean a hell of a lot of record sales, and probably a Greatest Hits album just around the corner. For the latter, one need only recall George W. Bush’s reaction to Bob Brown and Kerry Nettle’s protest during his address to the Australian Parliament last year. We might all love free speech, but I’m not the only one who saw Liberal Party members relishing the chance to physically jostle the Greens out of the way, thus making sure a petition for the release of David Hicks and Mambdouh Habib didn’t make it to the President.

2. How do you think the protestor is viewed by present Australian society? As social activist or threat against national security, or somewhere in between?

I doubt protestors are seen as a threat to national security because that’s often the issue that they are most vocal about — the current government’s close relationship with the United States and the consequences of that relationship for this country’s reputation in the region and the world generally. Quite rightly, Australian society has always viewed the protestor as a university student with too much time on their hands. But that doesn’t often lead to the explicit link between being educated and fighting for particular causes, or the further step of realising that ruling interests have always sought to restrict education opportunities for the majority. This is why Whitlam still regards his reforms to Higher Education as his lasting legacy, why my generation of graduates are so resentful of Baby Boomer investors and the mortgage belt, and why the imminent increases to HECS fees will make generations following mine very angry indeed.

3. Do governments encourage protest as a valid form of promotion for change? Does the media?

Governments prefer to be influenced through diplomatic channels, which of course depend on privileged access and an ability to speak the right language. The only form of protest governments welcome is the one that is registered at the ballot box. On the other hand, protests are good business for the mainstream media, because they conform to successful expectations of genre. That is, unless the target is the media – of which Outfoxed is one of many recent examples (see http://www.abc.net.au/mediawatch/transcripts/s1222362.htm) including the ABC’s pathbreaking Frontline, CNNNN, and the trusty Media Watch. That’s when things get interesting, and we start to see new forms protest, as well as censorship, emerge.

4. How is the promotion of a culture of fear affecting protests?

From what I understand, mainstream politics has always worked on a culture of fear. In terms of Australian electoral history, the Liberals’ interest rates and Latham L-plate campaign was pretty tame. Here the dominant mood seems to be one of indifference rather than fear, with voter indignation weighted equally with the politicians’ short-term vision and leftist observers who see voters as exceedingly susceptible to scare campaigns. Fear is much more a feature of the American political landscape, and it’s important to make that distinction. From a cultural studies perspective, Brian Massumi’s new work talks about the colour coding of the US terror warnings and how this works at an affective level — a register above and beyond “rationality”. I’m not sure we’ve reached that point in Australia yet, although we do need to quantify the ongoing effect of being “alert but not alarmed”. This makes me wonder, could complacency and negligence be the most fitting form of protest for our age?

5. Do you consider that the results of the last election in Australia reflect a lack of protest among Australian citizens, or simply an unwillingness to listen to the protests that did take place?

Neither. What’s clear is that the majority of voters protested against what intellectuals, amongst other urban-based citizens, deemed worthy of protest. Then again, speaking personally, when I protested against the war it wasn’t because I wanted to convert others, rather it was to send a message to Howard. What we all forgot is that our Prime Minister’s favourite line is “no one told me”.

6. Does the current state of consumerism, and the resultant dependency on a stable economy, contribute to a lack of protest among all Australians (others) against such issues as war, etc?

I don’t think consumerism is a useful concept in this context because it summons all the usual (and still gendered) associations with passivity that I don’t think are justified. I also think that the expectation of home ownership is something very important and unique to the Australian psyche, and that this sense of entitlement (bolstered by previous government policy and the onslaught of lifestyle TV programming) influenced the outcome of the recent election. Now, if we follow the convincing rationale of a theorist like Ghassan Hage, we could make a suggestion that the relationship between home, security and sovereignty in this country is a highly over-determined one. But all I know for sure is that it is only in a very wealthy and comfortable country like Australia that both political tendencies you mention could be evident — a concern over keeping the economy stable and a debate about whether or not we should intervene in the conduct of other nations.

7. Why was it considered in the discussion list that the West was increasingly Right in its outlook? Is this tied to a lack of protest?

Well, I think most of the discussants agreed that the ascendancy of Right wing politics in Australia is nothing new. It emerged most recently with the Labor Party under Hawke (who with Keating managed the deregulation of the economy) and gathered momentum with Pauline Hanson and the fallout from One Nation (who vented the contradictory cultural attitudes of strident protectionism). Probably of more concern to list members was the rise of Family First and the growing influence of religion in Australian politics, not only because this has always been seen as more of an American trend, but I’d suggest also because cultural studies has an ambiguous attitude towards religion. Glen Fuller and I recently described the success of the Bush Administration in terms of a discourse of Right-eousness: a rhetorical refrain that purposefully conflates politics with religion and patriotism. In this situation protest does become unlikely, because it risks the unenviable charge of anti-Americanism. But Australian patriotism has always been much more modest, so our particular articulation of Right-eousness will have to take that difference into account–probably by tying it to a tested trope like “the fair go”, which sits nicely with the neo-liberal preference for individual choice and enterprise, while also allowing for the current Howard-driven hegemony of the small business.

8. Is it correct to define a lack of protest as political “disengagement”?

It’s a familiar equation, and one especially rife on email lists–to be silent is to be complicit with whatever the current outrage might be. I think that misses a myriad of practices that take place locally, between individuals, or in situations like teaching or mentoring, as well as those encounters that work productively by way of negotiation, empathy and compromise. No one has a monopoly on what “counts” as politics. It’s important to acknowledge that the incitement to protest can often work on the same level of morality and invective that characterises the formation being protested against. Personally I take great comfort in those who advocate positivity as a form of resolve and strength – Mary Zournazi’s 2002 collection, Hope, is a clear example of this, as is the recent Italian theory of Ida Dominijanni or Bifo, together with the usual suspects in French theory. On its own, protest always risks buying in to an economy of negativity.

9. Is protest primarily an activity of left-aligned in Australia? Is protest by the Left considered a problem, and from the Right legitimate?

Like many, I’m a little uncomfortable with the Left-Right distinction these days. If we consider Left to mean socially progressive, and Right to mean conservative, there are examples of protest that take place on both sides all the time. For every Green voter urging the end to logging in old growth forests, there’s a logging family out on the street demanding their bread-winning job be protected. But aren’t these both conservative positions? And isn’t the gun lobby the most radical? It’s confusing. So I want to answer this question by saying that the rally or street protest is usually the activity of last resort. Which is to say that for those who already have power and influence—the mainstream media, for instance, that most people agree are at least conservative if not Right wing—such activities are unnecessary, and therefore easily frowned upon.

11. How can people voice their views in the current environment and have their voices heard/make a difference? How can the protestor legitimise their protest?

In most of my writing, I argue that the key considerations for creating a politics are access, audience, and address. There are plenty of ways people can voice their views in Australia—from blogging to talkback radio, street rallies to Reality TV, as well as regular elections. But the location for a political gesture and the manner in which it is expressed constitute the structures of legitimacy that will affect its reception. I might post a scathing political critique on my blog, but only those with Internet access and my web address will ever read it. My Aunt’s neighbour might vindicate Howard on John Laws’ morning show, and you can be sure I’ll never hear that. In societies segregated along lines of education, geography, and access, the problem we face is that we prefer to, and easily can listen to voices that comfort rather than confront us. And the majority who decide elections are mobilised by very different issues than those of us who enjoy unlimited access to networks of information, if not “power”. The great challenge for those who care about perpetuating this divide is to come up with new strategies, which include speaking a number of languages, navigating between constituencies for our ideas.

12. Is protest an innately selfish act? An individual (or a group of individuals) attempting to influence the thinking of the masses?

On the contrary, I think protests are an important means to perform and enjoy solidarity with others at a local and global level, at a time when neo-liberalism has made a concern for one’s own immediate fate the overriding political concern. Protest remains a vital means by which those lacking access to existing arrangements of power and privilege disrupt the conventional measures that otherwise ossify such inequities. Those are the precious moments when alternative messages can pierce the common sense ways our reality is usually constructed.

Melissa Gregg is Postdoctoral Research Fellow at the Centre for Critical and Cultural Studies, University of Queensland. Her research combines interests in cultural politics, feminism, and critical theory, with an emphasis on intellectual history. Melissa is currently working on a book entitled Addressing Cultural Studies: Affect in the Academy, and most recently her work has been published in Cultural Studies, Cultural Studies Review and Antithesis.


Bookmark this article: