An Anatomy of a Complaint to the Human Rights Commission
An Anatomy of a Complaint to the Human Rights Commission of Australia
In late 2020, I made a formal complaint to the Human Rights Commission over the book-cover for an anthology of fiction titled, After Australia, - After empire, after colony, after white supremacy…twelve diverse writers imagine an alternative Australia’.
The book was edited by Michael Mohammed Ahmad and published by Affirm Press with support of the Australia Council (Note 1).
This is the story of my complaint:
The Complaint - 5 October 2020 [ file download with hyperlinks here]
The First Response from the Human Rights Commission (HRC) - 19 November 2020
Additional Information Supplied to Support the Complaint - 28 November 2020 [ file download with hyperlinks here]
The Second Response from the HRC - 18 January 2021
Further Additional Information to Support the Complaint - 31 January 2021 [ file download with hyperlinks here]
Final Letter from the HRC Dismissing the Complaint - 6 April 2021
Termination Notice on the 'ground that the HRC was ‘satisfied the complaint is lacking in substance’ - 6 April 2021
The clincher paragraph in the HRC Letter of 6 April 2021 dismissing my complaint is on page 7:
‘The book cover that is the subject of your complaint, relates to a book of creative writing by members of minority groups within Australia and it exists in a context in which white people are not in any sense an oppressed group whose political and civil rights are under threat. I have noted your comments that the publisher and contributors to the book may be in a relatively higher position of power than you and many other white Australians of European decent. However, I am of the opinion that the context to be considered is not only the comparative social position of particular individuals, but also the historical, cultural and political context of Australian society.’
Thus, contrary to what many Australians think, the HRC believes ‘racism’ is not an absolute concept, but rather is a relative concept - any person of a ‘defined minority’ can be as racially abusive as they dare to a ‘white’ person with impunity in the eyes of the HRC, no matter what their relative socio-economic standing. Racism is only racist depending on who is doing it.
For the purposes of illustration (and meaning no disrespect to Stan Grant), does this mean that an Aboriginal man of say Stan Grant’s standing can, without fear of an HRC action against him, tell a homeless white beggar outside his local 7-Eleven that he is a ‘lazy white bludger and needs to move out of the way’?
Based on my experience, I would expect this down-and-out white man would have no case at the HRC, his only comfort being that he can bask in the glow of the ‘privilege’ that the HRC would say that he inherently has as a white man, with all the ‘historical, cultural and political context’ that brings to him in our ‘Australian society.’
Perhaps the book, ‘After Australia - After empire, after colony, after white supremacy…twelve diverse writers imagine an alternative Australia’ is, with the help of the HRC, about to become a book of non-fiction rather than fiction?
Note 1 - Correspondence with the Australia Council for the Arts
The Australia Council for the Arts initially denied that they had provided funding for the book After Australia (here A).
It was then pointed out to them that the Australia Council for the Arts was acknowledged in the book as having provided financial support (here B).
The Australia Council for the Arts then ‘reviewed its records in more detail’ and admitted that it had indeed provided funds for the book and thus its book cover, although the Council claims in email A above, ‘that it does not exercise editorial control over the activities supported.’ (here C).
