Category: Australia

During recent decades, an increasing number of people throughout the world are becoming aware of how crucial gender equality is. Men and women as citizens should have the same power, education, choices and treatment. However, it does not mean that people should treat men and women exactly the same; the key is the rights, responsibilities, and opportunities of men and women do not depend on whether they are born male or female.

The importance of women’s rights

With regards to the aspect of the population, economic and development programs, we need to acknowledge that women’s rights are intrinsically linked to society’s sustainable development (Roy). Also, women deserve equal treatment because that is a basic human right. Respect for women also means peace between the genders.

Gender equality in Australia

Positive development

Historically, Australia has had a big improvement in gender equality since the appointment of the first federal Sex Discrimination Commissioner in 1984 (Broderick). Since 2010, Australia has had a lot of firsts in terms of gender equality–the first female prime minister, Julia Gillard; first female governor-general, Quentin Bryce; first attorney-general, Nicola Roxon as well as several state Premiers. In addition, Australia is ranked fifth out of 128 countries on the Women’s Economic Opportunity Index in 2012, from which we can see the advancement of women’s economic power (Bowman).

Shortcomings:

• Nevertheless, there are also some drawbacks in gender equality in Australia. Firstly, because of the lack of flexible and family-friendly policies, there is an imbalance between men’s and women’s care responsibilities and working hours, and the wage gap between men and women has widened further(Workplace gender equality agency).
• Moreover, the proportion of women holding chair positions at companies is significantly lower than men. Sometimes, there is an invisible obstacle in front of women which we call the glass ceiling, it means intangible barriers that prevent women achieving a higher position (Lewis). Although women have the same ability as men and sometimes even exceed them, once they compete with other male employees, males have a higher possibility of getting the promotion.

  The reason behind these figures：

  The collision between work and family for women is one of the most serious gender inequalities they are confronted with, which directly becomes a barrier to women’s career and is associated with the gender pay gap. There are data that show women take the majority of childcare which shows the unequal division of care work between men and women. It leads to women usually experiencing irreversible loss of earnings when they need to take time off from paid-work for the sake of looking after children. Moreover, there is a negative impact of women taking parental leave which will affect their wages and chance for promotion because as the social competition is heating up, there is no leniency for women to leave the post of duty that long (Workplace gender equality agency).

• The inequality between genders in Australia is also reflected in the limited job choices, which can be seen as resulting from stereotypes. From the point of view of the public, some jobs seem to only belong to men or women by nature. For instance, there is a disproportion between men and women who choose to be teachers, especially early childhood teachers, nurses and other caring work. Despite some companies or social platforms boosting women to be engineers and encouraging men to be teachers, the ideology of different genders is still very strong. Also, it can be one of the reasons that cause the gender pay gap due to the nature of the work.

Gender equality in Saudi Arabia

In the aspect of gender equality, Saudi Arabia is in a less developed stage but is progressing slowly at the same time. Even a little tiny step of improvement will be seen as monumental. Gender equality can be seen as the most tough work to implement in this country.

In 2018, the 24th of June, was an extraordinary day for all Saudi women because they were authorized permission to drive a car. Saudi Arabia was the only country in the world that did not allow women to drive until last summer. Many people were fighting for this for a long period. (Jaafari)

Saudi women no longer need permission to go out, they can travel the world freely without any male guardian’s permission. Those rules were enforced by society and law which place restrictions on women’s freedom. (Deonath)

The reason for reform

Saudi Arabia is now in an unprecedented economic depression. In the last several decades, rich petroleum income has enabled the country to build a huge welfare system from cradle to coffin. However, the population is growing rapidly and there is a quickly aging population. Feast to famine, in 2014, oil prices plunged, and although they have now rebounded, they have had a serious negative impact on Saudi revenue. The young crown prince launched the reforms, for which women in the workforce has become crucial. This makes lifting the ban on female driving an important step in improving the Saudi economy’s efficiency in the long run. It may bring more educated women into the labor market. (Ketchell)

More restrictions (unsolved):

Hitherto, although some of them have been canceled like women are allowed to get a driver’s license, not all women are allowed to drive due to the man who makes the decisions do not always agree with them. Furthermore, when women need to go to the public area, they still have to cover most of their bodies, except their eyes and hands. Moreover, Saudi Arabia also is a country who implement gender segregation. In most of the public areas like restaurants, bank, university and public transportation, women and men usually need to be segregated. Otherwise, they will be accused due to the unlawful mixing and women often face more severe penalties. (Kruft) Except that, Saudi women also face the low wages, the pay gap between saudi women and men are 56%, and Saudi women’s unemployment rate is also the highest in the world. (Al-dubais) In brief, in the past two years, Saudi Arabia has some improvement in women’s rights, but there is still a long way to go to attain gender equality and it is going to be more and more hard because of the opposition of the religions.

For gender equality (own thinking)

Women, this gender should not bring any special and inequality. Everyone should be educated to be a complete and independent person, not just a woman. In my opinion, we all should support and advocate feminism, but now the word ‘feminism’ is too misleading. Women’s rights are men’s rights and human rights. Women’s rights are not how noblewoman is, nor privileges, but equal rights. Women’s rights ultimately strive for not protection and care, not special treatment, but the empowerment of each individual, equality of opportunity, elimination of gender dualism and gender stereotypes, and even ultimately downplay the importance of gender. From my perspective, the more unfair treatment women receive, the more unnecessary responsibilities men assume. Respect for women’s freedom of choice, but also for men to strive for freedom of choice. To strive for more rights for women is also to strive for more rights for men. Women’s rights are human rights. It’s not about women, it’s about everyone. Whether male or female, we all have the right not to be evaluated or defined. Gender equality in the true sense is when everyone is free to choose the life they want.

Diversity is a concept that reflects on the many ways we are alike while also respecting our individual differences. There are many aspects of diversity, such as cultural, racial and religion. Racial diversity occurs when many different ethnic groups are represented in a community. Not only is Australia a multicultural nation, it is also the most ethnically and racially diverse country in the world. The Australian Bureau of Statistics claims that there are around one hundred religions and three hundred ethnic groups in Australia. My artwork represents racial diversity within the Australian community through symbolism.

My painting consists of multi-coloured dots creating a shape which is outlined by a black marker. The dots are arranged to form a peace symbol and there is approximately the same number of dots for each colour. Many people mistake the peace sign in the wrong direction; many believe the two lines are pointing down, near the bottom of the circle. However, the genuine sign has the two lines pointing outward, located at the top of the circle. It signifies life, beginning and protection. The circle in the symbol represents the Earth while the three straight lines represent a tree growing on the planet. Additionally, each dot symbolises an individual within the community and different coloured dots depicts different skin tones. As the dots are roughly the same size, this reveals that no matter what skin tone someone is, everyone’s value is the same. Hence, racial diversity is seen in my painting through the symbolism of dots and lines, which form the peace symbol.

Furthermore, there is a variety of community values and attitudes towards racial diversity. Even though most people warmly accepts diversity, there are still people who disrespects the concept. Throughout the year, there are various multicultural fairs held in hopes of promoting a deeper understanding of unique ethnic heritages and eliminating racism in society. Many people would agree that these events enrich Australia as it brings different ethnicities together and also allows groups to experience other ethnicities’ ways of living. Yet, despite these numerous gatherings, some are still not willing to accept diversity, as they believe certain ethnicities, such as their own, are superior. They believe that by acknowledging it, all groups would be of the same significance and they do not wish for this to happen as they feel the need to make it known to others that some racial groups are of lower ‘value’. Thus, the majority of the community accepts diversity with open hands whilst some are still reluctant.

Moreover, due to the existing discrimination in the society, many people are suffering from negative impacts on their mental and physical health. There have been multiple incidents of unacceptable behaviour, such as verbal threats and bullying that were carried out towards groups of different backgrounds. At schools, students have been left out of friendship groups because of their stereotypical skin tone. This would result in increased stress levels and could also lead to depression. However, this behaviour could be changed if the community understood that diversity means coming together and celebrating our differences. Schools play a major part in educating students of young age but students are not educated about the importance of inclusiveness and diversity. To fix this problem, there could be yearly organisations which visit classes to educate children how racial diversity adds a brightness in the world. There could also be constant signs and posters in streets raising awareness in adults. Therefore, in order to promote empathy and understanding within the community, schools should educate students about diversity.

In conclusion, all diverse groups in Australia should feel supported in expressing their social identity and racial inheritance. Through valuing diversity, negative perceptions and inequities can be effectively challenged to support all members of the community. Together, as a community, we can battle through the hardships, such as racism and discrimination to become a better community. As seen in my painting, we can prove that no matter what race someone is, everyone is equal and no one should ever feel of lower value. Through the symbolism of my artwork, we can promote the acceptance of racial diversity within the community.

In the mid-1960s an indigenous civil rights movement was starting to occur and there were several individuals that had massive impacts on how indigenous Australians live today. One of these people was Eddie Mabo. Eddie Mabo was born in 1936 on Murray Island but by the mid-1960s found himself fighting for his rights as an individual and for the rights of all indigenous Australians. This endeavour began when he told two academics about how he dreamed about spending his last days alive on his ancestral home of Murray Island that had been handed down through 15 generations of his family. However, the two academics told Mabo that the land belonged to the crown and that it did not belong to him. This incident led him to dedicating his life to reversing the injustice that had been bestowed on all of the indigenous Australians. This injustice being terra nullius.

Terra nullius is a Latin term that is used to describe land that seemingly belongs to no one however, a lot of the so called empty land masses were inhabited so the term then grew to encompass the meaning of a land that is devoid of civilised society. This is what happened when Australia was discovered by the British colony which later caused several lawsuits to occur about who the land really belongs to.

A lot of indigenous Australians fell victim to terra nullius including Mabo but unlike most at this time Mabo wasn’t going to give up so easily. Mabo became an activist for black rights after gaining an education along with making sure that Aboriginal children had access to their own schools. Eddie Mabo didn’t think that the more militant direct action tactics were the best way of gaining back their rights and instead focused on the legal side of things by trying to change the legal justification that was used to steal their land away from them. Over a span of 18 years Eddie Mabo campaigned, petitioned and questioned terra nullius until in 1992 all of his years of sacrifice and persuasion was finally fulfilled. The High Court finally ruled that the Aboriginal people were the rightful custodians of the land. While this was an incredible moment for the Aboriginal people of Australia it was also heartbreaking for the man who had orchestrated the whole movement never lived long enough to see the change that he brought to society. Eddie Mabo had passed away just 5 months before the verdict due to cancer on January 1992 at the age of 55.

It can clearly be seen that the way Australia used to treat the Aboriginal people was unjust and unfair and there are still several things that need to be fixed and made up for even today. However, Eddie Mabo was the beginning of good changes towards the whole country of Australia and everybody has been effected by this act of goodness. It has effected everyone that lives in Australia in a way that from now on each generation will be able to reflect on this incident and be inspired to do good things for others and to make good decisions.

Bibliography

1. Australians together – The Indigenous civil rights movement in Australia. (2019, December 2). Retrieved from Austrlianstogether.org.au: https://australianstogether.org.au/discover/australian-history/civil-rights-movement/
2. Eddie Mabo, the man who changed Australia. (2019, December 2). Retrieved from BBC News: https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-18291022
3. Terra Nullius. (2019, December 2). Retrieved from Homepages.gac.edu: http://homepages.gac.edu/~lwren/AmericanIdentititesArt%20folder/AmericanIdentititesArt/Terra%20Nullius.html

Throughout the history of Australia, Aboriginal people have faced large amounts of discrimination in society and have not had equal opportunities. Between 1910 and 1970, Aboriginal children were removed from their families by federal and state governments and were forced to adopt a white culture to rid Australia or Aboriginal people. The US Civil Rights movement (1955- 1968), led by Martin Luther King Jr and other civil rights activists such as Rosa Parks, had a massive influence on Australian activism to seek equality for the Aboriginal people of their country. This wave of civil rights activism resulted in important changes for Aboriginal people, allowing them to gain their rights and freedoms to become a bigger part of Australian societies and be involved in the decisions made for their country. Despite all the successful changes for Aboriginal people and their rights, inequalities still exist, and further changes need to be made to achieve true equality.

During the 1950s and 60s, many significant events occurred in the US in an attempt to achieve equality for African-American citizens. Rosa Parks, who refused to give her seat to a white passenger on a segregated bus, which led to the Montgomery Bus Boycott, was a civil rights activist in America. This was a protest against segregation and racial discrimination on busses and trains in Montgomery. Martin Luther King Jr was a leader of the American civil rights movement and organised the March on Washington in 1963, which was a protest against racial discrimination and was supportive of civil rights and freedoms. Martin Luther King Jr gave a speech called “I Have a Dream” which was a call to end racism in America. One of the most famous quotes of this speech was, “I still have a dream, a dream deeply rooted in the American dream – one day this nation will rise up and live up to its creed, ‘We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are created equal.” The civil rights activists in America made many significant changes for African-American people, which motivated Australians to do the same.

After seeing the civil rights activism in America, Australians started to recognise the discrimination that Aboriginal people were facing, and civil rights activism began to rise in Australia. Since British colonisation, Australian land was declared “Terra Nullius”, meaning the land belonged to no one, this meant that Aboriginal people had lost their right to own Australian land. Organised by Charles Perkins, an Aboriginal student, On February 12, 1965, a group of university students who were inspired by the American Freedom Rides did a tour of multiple towns to see firsthand the conditions that Aboriginal people were living in. The students were shocked upon arriving in the towns as they found that the Aboriginal people were barred from pubs, public swimming pools, cafes and were rejected service in many shops and bars. During this time, civil rights activists in Australia became more motivated to seek equality for Aboriginal people as a result of the US Civil Rights Movement.

Multiple events occurred after the US Civil Rights movement to achieve equality for Aboriginal people in Australia, including the Mabo Decision and the Freedom Rides. In 1982, a group led by Eddie Mabo decided to challenge their land rights and began their legal claim for ownership of their traditional lands, they were initially rejected but after ten years, on June 3, 1992, the Mabo Decision was made. This decision meant that Aboriginal people had regained rights to their traditional land, which existed before British colonisation. Charles Perkins, a civil rights activist, became the first Aboriginal Australian to graduate from university in 1966 and in 1984 became the first Aboriginal Australian to be the Secretary of the Department of Aboriginal Affairs. During the Freedom Ride in 1965, Perkins motivated the Aboriginal people to stand up for their rights and freedoms, he tells them, “We are willing enough to stand here but you people have to do it from this week on. No one is going to stand up for you but yourselves. If you don’t do it now, your kids will be in the same position as you are when they grow up.” After the US Civil Rights movement, changes were made in Australia to achieve rights for Aboriginal people and civil rights activists became more motivated to reach their goals.

The US Civil Rights movement had a large impact on Australia and led to significant changes for Aboriginal people’s rights and freedoms. There have been multiple changes to the Australian constitution which contribute to equal rights. In a 1967 referendum, 90.77% of Australian citizens voted “YES” to allow the federal parliament to make laws concerning the rights and freedoms of Aboriginal people and to include their votes in federal elections and referendums. On February 13, 2008, Prime Minister, Kevin Rudd apologised to the stolen generation on behalf of the federal government, recognising their struggles. However, many were still upset that it took so long for this to happen. A young Aboriginal girl named Tazma stated, “I’m happy that our prime minister Kevin Rudd said sorry, then again I’m angry because it took so long for them to apologise to the Aboriginal people”. Racial discrimination in Australia has significantly decreased as a result of the civil rights activism in both America and Australia, however, there are still changes that need to be made to reach equality.

Throughout history, racism was and still is a major issue in societies. In the US, the Civil Rights movement had a significant impact on racial discrimination towards African-Americans, events such as the Montgomery Bus Boycott, inspired by Rosa Parks and the March on Washington organised by Martin Luther King Jr were just two examples of the many civil rights movements in America. These movements had an influence on Australia to reach equality for Aboriginal people. Eddie Mabo achieved land rights for the traditional owners of Australian land and Charles Perkins organised a freedom ride to expose the living conditions of Aboriginal people. Changes were made to the Australian constitution, giving more rights to Aboriginal Australians and allowing them to vote. These changes were influenced by the US Civil Rights movement, Australia has come very far in terms of achieving equality, however, there are still many issues surrounding this matter that need to be addressed.

The creation of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights helped pinpoint the discrimination of many Indigenous peoples around the world. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights was made after World War II, in 1948, to prevent any similar events. When this was created it showed how, in many countries around the world, Indigenous people had little to no rights in comparison to others. Thus, the Civil Rights movement was created. Many Indigenous people stood up for their rights and protested for equality. In the USA, Rosa Parks refused to give up her seat to a white person resulting in the Montgomery Bus Boycott and, in Australia, workers on Wave Hill went on strike to demand equal pay and land rights. These events eventually lead to a change in rights for the Indigenous peoples of the nation. The Australian Civil Rights movement originally began as a response to the US Civil Rights movement, which resulted in changes for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders regarding equality and land rights, however, not all inequalities have been resolved and there are continuing efforts to implement further change and reconciliation.

The Civil Rights movement in America was a long and hard journey that ended in success. There were many activists that participated and, through media coverage, made a big impact on the world. Renowned activists include the Little Rock Nine, Martin Luther King Jr. and the Freedom Riders. Another activist was Rosa Parks, who refused to give up her seat on a bus to a white person. At that time, this was an intolerable act as buses had a strict segregation policy which required African-Americans to stand for white people. Rosa Parks was arrested, and this sparked the Montgomery Bus Boycott. The initial event occurred on December 1st, 1955; this was around the time that equality was demanded by the African-American community. The Montgomery Bus Boycott started the same month as the arrest and lasted for 381 days, only ending when the US Supreme Court ordered the City of Montgomery to end segregation. The purpose of this strike was to protest for the end of segregation on public transport, and in general, between African-Americans and white Americans. The American Civil Rights movement was an immense factor that led to the Australian Civil Rights movement, the media coverage and success of the African-Americans inspired Indigenous Australians to become activists.

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders were inspired by the American Civil Rights movement, and were prompted to become activists and protest for their rights. Some events that occurred and activists who participated in the Civil Rights movement in Australia include the Australian Freedom Riders, the Yirrkala Bark petitions, the Wik decision and Eddie Mabo. Another major event was the Wave Hill walk-off. Vincent Lingiari led the Gurindji people on a strike of Wave Hill station as a response to the British Vestey Company’s refusal to pay them equal wages and as a protest for land rights. The initial walk-off occurred on the 23rd of August 1966 and ended in 1973 after a 7-year strike. This event brought awareness to the issues of land rights and discrimination. In 1967, Vincent Lingiari and Gurindji leaders petitioned for the traditional Gurindji land, this was refused by the governor-general. This strike occurred to protest for the equal payment of aborigines and white workers, and for the Gurindji’s rights to traditional land. This event and many others were protests to fight for land rights across Australia, and succeeded in changing the rights for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders.

As a result of the Civil Rights movement in Australia, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders were successful in achieving change. Some changes that occurred were the 1967 referendum, the change in land rights and the reconciliation effort by government leaders. The Wave Hill walk-off was a key event that led to the recognition of land rights for Indigenous people. In 1975, two years after the Wave Hill walk-off ended, Prime Minister Gough Whitlam poured earth into Vincent Lingiari’s hands, which symbolised 3300 square kilometres of land for the Gurindji people. In 1976, the Frazer government passed the Aboriginal Land Rights Act which granted land title to Indigenous tribes including the Gurindji people, however, mining companies still negotiated for leases with state governments without consulting the traditional owners. The Tent Embassy was another protest for land rights and compensation for lost land. Tents were set up outside Parliament to keep Aboriginal rights in the public eye. Each time they erected the embassy, their demands were rejected, and they were removed by police. This occurred until land rights were changed. The Civil Rights movement in Australia has provided change for the rights of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders but there are still injustices that many believe need to be rectified.

The US Civil Rights movement inspired the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders of Australia to start a movement of their own, resulting in many successful protests which have secured land rights and equality for Indigenous peoples, yet there are still inequalities that need to be resolved in our society. The US Civil Rights movement consisted of many key events such as the March on Washington, the Montgomery Bus Boycott, Little Rock Nine and the Freedom Rides, which achieved a lot of success and media coverage, this inspired many to stand up for their rights. The Australian Civil Rights movement consisted of many events such as the Wave Hill walk-off, the Australian Freedom Rides, the Yirrkala bark Petitions, the Wik Decision and the Mabo vs Queensland court case, which protested for equality and land rights. As a result of these events, Australia has implemented changes such as: the successful 1967 Referendum which allowed Aborigines to be counted in the census, the recognition of land rights in the Aboriginal Land Rights Act of 1976, the Native Title Act was made law in 1993 and there were speeches made by Prime Ministers, such as Kevin Rudd and Paul Keating, to achieve reconciliation. There are still injustices in our society, such as the unpaid compensation for the Stolen Generations, but there are also continuing efforts to achieve reconciliation and further change.

Liberal democracy can be considered a form of the government’s systems where the rights of individuals and the freedoms are highly recognisable. Liberal democracy also means that the rule of law restricts political power—nations such as Australia, the United States, Canada, and Britain. Follow the system of Liberal Democracy. Liberal democracy attempts to defend civil rights and liberties against the enrichment of authoritative sources in society (Governments and institutions).

The public sphere was introduced in the 1700s. It is understood to be a domain of social life for public opinion. Before the public sphere, the public conversation was understood to be an expression of power. It was formed to allow all individuals to be included in every conversation in which people came together. The commencement of the public sphere meant Individuals did not have to act on behalf of organisations or private interests to be engaged in conversation. Rather than this, they were able to communicate their opinions for the sole purpose of uniting and freely expressing opinions.

Communal and group rights are applied to as a whole group rather than the individuals within the group. The names themselves describe the nature of the right holder. However, the fact that rights are limited to people in that group, instead the outside members of society or large groups of humanity is not explicitly described. Much of the debate surrounding these rights is focused on whether these groups are entitled to hold certain rights. If they are entitled to these rights, the conditions they must meet are also discussed.

Sovereignty can be understood to be the ultimate overseer, the authority or supreme power in the process of maintaining order and decision making. Sovereignty can also be related to royal rank or high positions in government as possessed or claimed by states or communities. Sovereignty is the given right of a government to have unlimited zonal power, especially over the laws of the land, water, or air where international laws state.

Terra Nullius originates from Latin roots and means nobodies land. It is a term used to declare land unoccupied or uninhabited by international law. The term was sometimes used to claim territory which might be developed by a state’s occupation. The term is used to reject that land was ever part of a sovereign state.

Within the Australian Parliament, different parties are formed by members who are elected before federal or state Parliament as well as in the upper or lower house. These people are elected to represent parties as electorates. Usually, individuals are made to believe they are voting for an individual when that individual is representing a pollical party. These representatives have party leaders, which implement direction and discipline. Although the representatives are portrayed as individuals we are voting for; some individuals are known as the independents who are not apart of a political party. These individuals who are elected as independents usually claim that they have the extra ability to represent the ideas of local communities rather than the people more accurately who represent a party. They are free from the head of a party and the strict disciplines. This claim is, to some extent, probably factual; however, they still face many barriers in proving this statement. They most likely lack the resources, funding, and media expertise to promote their campaigns and political debates that those which are supported by parties have. They are usually the more isolated voices which have little influence on politics and the more extensive policy and legislation procedures. Due to this, the fact that independents are better able to represent people in their electorates is not valid.

The ANZUS Alliance is a security treaty signed on the 1st of September in 1951. This alliance has been in place for over 60 years between Australia, New Zealand, and the united states of America. This alliance was made to ensure and maintain the safety and peace in the pacific region. The treaty states that the parties within the agreement desire to strengthen the peace. They declared this publicly and formalised unity. This unity requires signatories to discuss any expected threats or dangers to the involved nations. Australia has relied for so long on American power to protect the country however both the government and electorate desire the security benefits which they still receive from the ANZUS treaty but also want the economic benefits of the fruitful relationship with china. However, the ANZUS treaty allows Australia to continue receiving gains in natural autonomy, security, maturity and international policy flexibility and access to military technologies. The ANZUS Alliance is in Australians contemporary national interest. It is recommended that it should be viewed as a statement of shared values which are capable of being used in the face of evolving contemporary threats rather than just a specific set of requirements.

In the modern world, social media is a predominant aspect for many individual’s and can spark various judgments related to politics, either enhancing or negatively impacting their decisions. Social media can also be used to inform candidates on specific approaches that can be undertaken to influence potential voters. Young adults use social media to engage with politics which increases their participation in elections enabling them to enhance their political decisions and assisting the government in improving their arguments in political debates. Social media has enabled government officials to be accessible to their voters through educating their audience with valuable content and engaging with them to provide information on enhancing their political system. Social media assists the government with producing commercials and publish advertisements for free, enabling them to broadcast their messages to the broader audience at no cost. Social media platforms, including Twitter and Facebook, have become instrumental in organising political campaigns and allow the audience to share information based on their judgements related to politics. These platforms are also used to start campaigns that can be used to begin fundraising to raise large amounts of money in a short period. Social media platforms can overthrow political leaders by blocking their statements. By doing these individuals can further alter their opinions on political debates, supporting this is platform twitter. In recent social media posts made by Donald Trump, twitter placed a public interest notice for breaching twitter guidelines and for causing harm against the audience.

The Parliament of Australia is composed of a lower house being The House of Representatives and the upper house being the Senate. Members of the house of representatives make up the houses primary function. It is the house that takes up most of the time considering and discussing either new laws or amendments on existing laws. The house of the Senate represents states or territories. It consists of 76 senators twelve from each of the six states and two from the mainland territories. Both houses use different methods of electoral systems and follow different terms. Senators are elected based off a system of proportional representation. Proportional representation is an electoral system in which parties can accurately gain seats in proportion to the number of votes cast for them. To vote for a member in the house of representative’s individuals are required to number the candidates from their first choice through to their last choice. This is known as preferential voting. Both forms of voting are effective; however, both have their limitations. Donkey votes can become occurrent as people may not understand, or just not care, or they might just not have anyone they would like to vote. This creates an unfair result. Proportional voting has the downfall of allowing voters to vote by the party, not the selected individual representatives. In this case, preferential voting is better; it allows voters to have their other choices considered and counted.

Women are passionate and can bring upon a change in their country; however, they are held back due to specific barriers as they are not provided with resources or mentors that are willing to enhance their knowledge. Governments that value diversity has a higher chance of having effective resolutions cause of their diverse leadership team. More than 50% of the world’s population are women which enable their views to be reflected upon within the Parliament as they can have particular beneficial views because of their personal experiences. Specific public health issues can also be worked upon through women in Parliament because of their perspectives being different compared to men. Women are underestimated and underrepresented; however, the proportion of women in Parliament is gradually increasing as more than 20 per cent of politicians are women. The most critical barrier causing fewer women politicians is based upon institutional mindset as individuals assume women cannot lead the country towards success based on their stereotypical roles in society and their lifestyle choices as it is depicted that women cannot balance personal life and work life. Specific barriers can be overcome through mentors and sponsors as they can assist with addressing women leadership challenges and ensure they have the helpful resources to gain knowledge. They can also be overcome by bringing upon a change in the political system, challenging assumptions made by the audience and by enhancing the procedures of individual networks related to politics.

According to the principles of liberal democracy, elected governments should balance the will of the majority with the rights of individuals and minorities. In June 2020, during the COVID 19 pandemic, protestors marched in Australian cities under the banner of ‘Black Live Matter’ despite government attempts to discourage and even prevent those protests. Outline and evaluate the arguments for and against staging these protests. In your answer, refer to concepts and ideas we have discussed in Australian Politics and Active Citizenship.

Individuals have rights, and minorities share these rights. The principles of liberal democracy insist the elected governments balance the will of the majority with these rights of individuals. Covid-19 pandemic has affected both individuals and majorities has tested the principles of liberal democracy and their effectiveness in situations. Governments have had to apply these principles to balance the safety of individuals while still satisfying the needs of society. Throughout this pandemic, protests were planned and carried out despite the discouragement or complete ban of protests; however, the governments need to keep in mind the rights of people.

Furthermore, governments are made up of various systems. Liberal democracy is understood to be one of these political systems. Liberal democracy is a democratic system where the individual rights and freedoms are formally recognised and protected, and the practice of political power which is limited by the rule of law. Liberal democracies can defend and nourish civil liberties against the enrichment of higher powers in society. His form of democracies is also able to give a consensual ideology of different societies based on the religious, political-economic and moral freedom of citizens. Liberal Democracy follows some main principles to apply to the way governments handle situations. These principles include beliefs in the individual, which is based on the idea that individuals are both moral and rational. It supports the belief in reason and progress based on the idea that growth and development are the natural progressions of humanity with the compromise being the art of politics. Liberal democracy is also based on the ideas that society is seen as a mutual association with benefits. This is based on the need for cooperation rather than conflict and chaos. The last principle of liberal democracy is that there is power in concentrated forms; this can be expressed by governments, individuals and groups. When dealing with the situations of ‘Black lives matter’ marches and the COVID 19 governments need to be aware and wary of following these principles as well as considering the human rights of individuals which include, freedom of speech, freedom of expression, freedom of peaceful assembly and of association and the right to take part in the conduct of public affairs.

Keeping in mind, the Black Lives Matter protests, and advocacy has been a much spoken about topic in the current-day news. It is an organised movement which has received international social and political coverage. The movement is aimed at ridding alleged incidents of police brutality. It is also aimed to encourage peaceful civil disobedience to the higher powers in society. Australia’s governments sought out to prevent or ban these peaceful protests In hope to reduce the rate of the current covid19 disease. The gathering of many people nearby would mean an increase in the risk of infection rates. Although it was highly advised to refrain from attending these planned protests, legislation was not passed to confirm it would be unlawful to attend. Although no legislation was passed, the tone of Scott Morrison was sharpened, and he mentioned that if protesters are n the streets in the coming days they will be charge however many did assemble and it was confusing. These individuals were not breaching any laws and expressed heir many reasons for and against these staged protests. The majority of individuals believed by protesting in the spike of the black lies matter campaign they will be able to shed some much-needed light on our own country which is believed to be far from innocent when associated with police brutality against indigenous Australians.

Many fundamental concepts of Australian politics and active citizenship are evident within the situation of COVID-19 and the black lives matter protests. Factors of the public sphere, social movements and individual rights are all shown by current societies and contemporary governments. The public sphere opens political agendas, informs the public, creates robust and critical debate. The public sphere is one of the many concepts which are seen through the COVID 19 pandemic and black lives matter marches. The general public main conversation has been revolving this topic and individuals are educating themselves more to become informed. Social movements represent activism as a counterbalance to oppressing control of the political process. The rights of individuals are also shown to be tested within current day society. Groups and societies are pushing boundaries to the absolute limit in order to exercise their rights as much as possible.

According to the principles of liberal democracy, elected governments should balance the will of the majority with the rights of individuals and minorities. The current situation of the Cocid-19 pandemic and the black lives matter marches has tested all aspects of the liberal democratic system. Individuals have rights, and minorities share these rights, governments are also made up of various systems, liberal democracies known to be one of these political systems. Governments were and are needed to take into these considerations I order to come up with balanced, fair and just rules, legislations, and the reasons either for or against also.

This essay aims to explore migration in The United States of America (USA) and Australia, as in some instances they have very similar migration patterns. It will be an investigation into the similarities between the two countries regarding immigration laws and policies.

Immigration Laws and Policies in Australia

Australia is a country that has a very rich and positive migration history. However, this has not always been the case and Australia’s laws and policies are constantly changing. A major pull factor that caused large masses of people to migrate to Australia was the Gold Rush that began in 1851. At this time, it was highly encouraged and people came in large groups. On December 23 1901, the new immigration act ‘white Australia’ was introduced into parliament. This law was set in place to decrease and limit the amount of non-European immigrants coming into the country. The white people believed that the non-white people had incorrect ways of life and at this time Australia was run by Europeans. This did not have any impact on the Greeks as being a European country they were admitted to Australia without any test or penalty, although it did not stay like this for very long. The term ‘white alien’ was widely used around the same time as the White Australia legislation was set in place. This term referred to non-British Europeans including Greeks, Italians just to name a few. Greeks were seen as semi colored and were prohibited from immigrating to Australia from 1916 to 1920. This evidently created a large decrease in Greek Immigration to Australia. Not only this but there were many rules implemented so that the country did not become overpopulated.

Immigration Laws and Policies in the United States of America

America has had many different immigration acts and policies that have encouraged and discouraged Greeks at different periods in time. Greeks came to America by masses. They came legally and illegally. When the United States adopted immigration quotas in 1924, and would only accept 100 immigrants from Greece each year and they would have to undertake a language test. This was very belittling for the Greeks as English was not their mother tongue, unlike a large majority of Europe. The Greeks that did remain or was able to enter the USA were highly discriminated against and treated terribly. It was not until 1965 the number of Greek immigrants began to increase again. This is a result of the 1965 Immigration Act which allowed many Greek families to come and live with family members that had immigrated to America. Between 1965 and 1975 alone, more than 142,000 people came to the United States from Greece.

Immigration Laws and Policies Comparison Between Australia and the USA

There are many similarities between Australia and the USA in regards to immigration laws and policies. A major similarity being that both countries set laws in place to eradicate the amount of non-white Europeans. Racism at the time of Greek immigration was extraordinarily bad and skin color had a large play in that. Although Europe was very highly respected countries including Italy and Greece were discriminated against due to the color of their skin and the language that they spoke. Both Australia and America had laws in place to limit the amount of these people that came into their country. Another similarity was that both countries implemented rules to stop the country becoming overpopulated. This was not targeted at any race in general but it was extra hard for Greece before they became a republic in 1924.

Conclusion

In summary, Australian and US immigration law and policy do have a lot in common. First of all, the similarity lies in the policy towards non-white Europeans and the problem of overpopulation.

References

1. Population of Australia. (2019). Population of Australia 2019. Retrieved from http://www.population.net.au/
2. Worldometers. (2019). Population of the United States (2019 and historical). Retrieved from https://www.worldometers.info/world-population/us-population/
3. Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2019). 3412.0 – Migration, Australia, 2017-18. Retrieved from https://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Latestproducts/3412.0Main%20Features22017-18
4. Lange, J. (2018). U.S. Foreign-Born Population Swells to Highest in Over a Century. Retrieved from https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-immigration-data/u-s-foreign-born-population-swells-to-highest-in-over-a-century-idUSKCN1LT2HZ
5. Simon-Davies, J. (2018). Top 10 Countries of Birth for the Overseas-Born Population Since 1901. Retrieved from https://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Parliamentary_Library/pubs/rp/rp1819/BornOverseas

Today’s society is ever-changing, with new demands being asked from the government regularly, due to this it is important that our government is able to meet and deal with these demands. One of these demands was same-sex marriage. Gay marriage was a law introduced into Australia in 2017, which allowed two people of the same gender to be legally bound through marriage. Previous to this law same-sex marriage was not recognized as legally binding because it did not fit within our 1961 Marriage Act. There was talk of the act being passed as early as 2012. Then in 2017 as many bills were getting closed, Malcolm Turnbull asked the ABS to conduct a survey which then led into the law getting legalized on the 7th of December, 2017 making it legal to marry the same gender in Australia.

Since the 2004 amendment towards the Marriage Act of 1961 which created the current definition of marriage, 23 bills dealing with marriage equality and or the acknowledgement of overseas same-sex marriages have been introduced into the federal parliament. The 23 bills were introduced by members of parliament who represented the Australian Democrats, the Australian Greens, the Australian Labor Party, the Derryn Hinch’s Justice Party, the Liberal Democratic Party,the Liberal Party of Australia, the Nick Xenophon Team and by the Independents. Then a few years later in 2010, 2012 and 2013, 3 bills were brought to a vote in the senate with an additional one in 2012 in the house of representatives. These bills were however denied in the second reading stage. However, in 2015 Bill Shorten introduced the first cross-party bill of gay marriage with the Greens. This reignited the public interest causing protests which created tension between the public and parliament. Then in 2017 due to the tension and a lot of bills being passed Scott Morrison decided to hold a vote. After the vote came back saying that 61% of the Australian population that voted said that they wanted it to be legalized and after going through a parliamentary vote, the law was passed on the 7th of December 2017.

The process of adjusting the amendment towards the Marriage Act of 1961 was a slow and painful procedure that was heavily influenced not only by members of parliament but also the public. Between 2010 to 2013, 4 bills were denied in the second reading causing the 1961 Marriage Amendment to remain the same. Then in August 2015, Bill Shorten introduced the first cross-party, same-sex, marriage bill. On the 19th of August 2015, the Marriage Equality Plebiscite Bill was introduced to the Senate. This was backed by the Greens and other members of the Senate crossbench, who would put forward a bill to ensure a fair question on marriage equality is put to the people no later than the next election. The bill, however, expired at the prorogation of the 44th Parliament. The bill then re-emerged on 14th of December 2016 in the House of Representatives and sought out for a compulsory national plebiscite. The question was ‘Should the law be changed to allow same-sex couples to marry?’. The bill passed the lower house on the 20th of October but was denied at the second reading in the Senate on the 7th of November 2016. Then between 12 September and 7 November 2017, Malcolm Turnball decided to host a nationwide postal vote on whether the public believed that the law should be changed to allow gay marriage. The postal vote came back with the results stating that 61% of Australians wanted the law to be changed. Finally, on the 15th of November 2017, Senator Dean Smith introduced a bill on behalf of ‘8 cross parties’ a bill to amend the Marriage Act 1961. The bill was to redefine marriage as ‘a union of two people’. The bill passed the third reading on the 29th of November 2017 which meant it was the first time the bill was debated by another chamber. The bill was further introduced into the third reading stage in the ‘House’, on the 7th of December 2017 and received Royal Assent the following day.

The new amendment to the Marriage Act 1961 was seen to many as necessary, after many years of perseverance from both the public and the government. This was done, by allowing the public to vote for whether they believe the amendment should be changed. The passing of the bill ultimately modernized Australia even more.

In a world full of fast communications, rapid technological change, and global reach, many social issues arise leading to social change. Homelessness is one of the main ones that have arisen to become an Australian and worldwide concern. The latest estimates reveal that the number of homeless people in Australia increased by 4.6 percent over the last five years, according to poll data from the 2016 Census of Population and Housing. The Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) said 116,000 people were homeless on the night of the census, representing 50 homeless people per 10,000 people.

Definition of Homelessness

According to the Canadian definition of homelessness, homelessness is ‘the situation of an individual, family or community without stable, safe, durable or adequate housing, or immediate possibilities and access to it’. But in Australia, there are many definitions of what it means to be homeless, but the most acceptable definition of homelessness encompasses three sections, which embody the diversity of homelessness experiences.

• Primary homelessness – is when people do not have traditional housing. For example, rough sleep or improvised homes such as sleeping in their car.
• Secondary homelessness – is when people are forced to move from one temporary shelter to another. For example, moving between emergency housing and shelters. This involves ‘couch surfing’.
• Tertiary homelessness – is when people live in accommodation below the minimum standards. This can be an indoor house, a mobile park, or very crowded beds.

Main Causes of Homelessness

Domestic violence is one of the main causes of homelessness in Australia. Homelessness can be the result of many social, economic and health factors. According to ‘Mission Australia’, people can become homeless after many years of poverty, poor relationships, drug, alcohol or mental health issues. This sometimes affects people whose lives are well managed but are driven off track by a stressful cycle such as a breakup of a relationship, loss of a job, or death of a loved one. This can lead to a series of events that leaves a person without a place to live. Fact, a quarter of people who ask for accommodation in the specialized homeless services are there because of domestic and family violence while another 15% seek help due to financial difficulties. 12% of them face housing crisis and 10% of homeless people live in improper or inappropriate housing.

Homelessness and Human Fundamental Rights

Human rights are designed to ensure that people have the means to meet their basic needs, such as food, housing, and education so that they can take full advantage of all and every opportunity. Their main aim is to guarantee a good life of freedom, equality, and security to everyone so that they are living a valuable and respectful life without any abuse especially from those who are more powerful.

But if you think about it, aren’t homeless people human too? Why don’t they live a guaranteed life as well? Instead, they face violations of a wide range of human rights. Accessing safe and secure housing is one of the most basic human rights and the main concern for homeless people. On the Australian Human Rights Commission website on ‘Homelessness Is a Human Right Issue’, I read many messages of homeless people that made me go emotional. One of the homeless kids said “As a ‘street kid’, I lived in constant fear of violence. There was no door I could lock to separate me from the rest of the world. There was no safe place for me to just be”.

However, homelessness is not just about housing. A person who is homeless may be suffering violations of the right to an adequate standard of living, the right to education, the right to liberty and security of the person, the right to privacy, the right to social security, the right to freedom from discrimination, the right to vote and many more.

Hence, I strongly believe that it is extremely important to recognize that homelessness affects a person’s ability to enjoy fundamental rights and freedoms where we must show that homeless people are not just charitable things, seeking help and compassion. But like all Australians, they are individuals entitled under international law to protect and promote their human rights. Therefore, we must all work for hand on hand together with the United Nations to end and address the problem of homelessness.

How Can Homelessness Be Ended?

If everyone in the community works collaboratively, by stabilizing people through shelter, relocating them to permanent housing, and implementing assistance programs to keep them in their homes, we will not only be able to reduce but also eliminate homelessness in Australia. It’s not necessary to do the top mentioned jobs yourself, because many specialized organizations aim and work towards ending and helping homelessness all over Australia. The main organizations are – Homelessness Australia, Mission Australia, Street Smart Australia, Salvation Army, and St. Vincent De Paul Society. So, take action, come together and make a role for yourself in solving and preventing the issue of homelessness by supporting either of the organizations mentioned above.

Conclusion

In conclusion, homeless is a series issue that needs to stop before increasing any further. It cannot be determined by one cause. The case contains a complicated mix of social and individual causes. Individual causes of homelessness affect a large percentage of the population with diseases such as mental illness and addiction. Society has affected homelessness with a decline in affordable housing and limited funding compared to the scope of the problem as well. In addition to that and through the whole research that I did, I realized that a homeless doesn’t need to be an older man with alcohol or drug problems while sleeping in a park or street within the city. However, the census figures prove that there is no ‘typical’ homeless person. Homelessness can affect anyone including men, women, and children from a wide range of backgrounds that live in our cities, suburbs, towns, etc.

For a significantly long time Australian culture has been separated by the discussion over asylum seekers and refugees, who touch our shores by boat. In the expressions of our National Anthem, they have ‘come across the seas’, yet the two sides of governmental issues have misrepresented the test they present to this nation. Australia’s reaction has been to devise ever-harsher strategies that intend to prevent those escaping war and brutality and to detain individuals who are in reality unfortunate casualties.

The Australian National Anthem holds values that need to be critically assessed by the Australian Legal System. Legislation, for example, the Migration Act 1958 with the Migration Regulations 1994 (Commonwealth), contains point by point which decides about the criteria that must be met by non-residents wishing to enter or stay in Australia, regardless of whether incidentally or for all time. Prior to 1994, the arrangements managing unapproved entries were incredibly unpredictable. Non-citizens landing in the nation without a substantial visa or other authority to enter were subject at first to ‘pivot’ arrangements. They were confined for sped up evacuation and regarded not to have ‘entered’ Australia by any stretch of the imagination. This was so despite the fact that the evacuation procedure during which they were held in detainment frequently stretched out over months and even years. These detainees were managed none of the procedural protections given to non-residents who ended up unlawful after formal, legal, section into the nation. This imperfectly justifies how our Australia national anthem doesn’t live up to its values. In saying this it provides protection for Australia and needs to be enforced. Non legal measures are put into place to protect the human rights of asylum seekers and refugees. The effectiveness of this non-legal response is that Amnesty International works to ensure that asylum seekers and refugees affected are treated humanely. They offer insight to the government, influencing them to commit adequate resources to an effective, human-rights based regional framework that addresses the reasons for regular migration. This campaign is extremely effective in relation to asylum seekers and refugees as it is profound to commit adequate dedication for the benefit of asylum seekers and refugees. Amnesty is a community campaign that extends a helping hand to asylum seekers, treating them like family and helping them to be their best without discrimination. The convention does not impose on the state the process or procedures that deal with granting asylum. Instead, this is left to the state to determine and allowed for under their sovereign rights found at international customary law. The right to seek asylum is universally applicable and found in the United Nations declaration of human rights which states in article 14 “everyone has the right to seek asylum”. This incongruity infests each part of our way of life – it’s even caught in our song of praise. We join in proclaiming that our young, free, and bountiful land is one that ought to be accessible to any individual who needs it: for those who’ve come across the sea. To keep our lifestyle, it is appropriate to verify Australia’s borders and make an orderly and reasonable migration. Guaranteeing that those touching base by boat don’t get an out of line weakness over others. Everybody is subject ‘who’ve run over the oceans’ to a reasonable and steady evaluation procedure to avoid overcrowding in detention centers in Australia. Finally, to counteract individuals setting out on a voyage crosswise over risky oceans with the ever-present danger of death.

The combined effect of sections 256 and 193 is that all detainees in immigration detention have the right to legal advice and the right to be advised of their rights to legal advice unless they arrive in Australia unlawfully by boat. The combined effect of sections 256 and 193, however, is that detainees who arrive unlawfully by boat have the right to legal advice if they request it but not the right to be advised of their right to legal advice. There is no statutory prohibition on advising boat people of their right to legal advice but equally no obligation to tell them. The effectiveness of this non legal response is that the refugee council of Australia offers endless support to asylum seekers and refugees. The aim of the council is to treat asylum seekers and refugees as humanely as possible, how any and all human should be treated anyway. The Refugee Council of Australia promotes the adoption of flexible, humane and practical policies towards refuges and asylum seekers in Australia and internationally through conducting research, advocacy, and policy analysis and community education. The effectiveness of this non legal response is that it provides an arcuate hand for refugees and asylum seekers to fall back on in times of need. We pay lip service to words of inclusion without living their reality: we sing that Australia has plenty to offer those who wish to come here, but in reality, we lock down our borders to exclude refugees. The joined impact of areas 256 and 193 is that all detainees in movement confinement reserve the privilege to legitimate counsel and the privilege to be instructed with respect on their right side to lawful exhortation except if they touch base in Australia unlawfully by boat. The consolidated impact of segments 256 and 193, in any case, is that detainees who arrive unlawfully by boat reserve the privilege to lawful exhortation in the event that they demand it yet not the privilege to be instructed with respect on their right side to legitimate counsel. There is no statutory disallowance on instructing boat people with respect to lawful counsel yet similarly no commitment to tell them. The adequacy of this non legitimate reaction is that the Refugee Council of Australia offers unending help to shelter asylum seekers and refugee people. The point of the board is to regard asylum seekers as evacuees as altruistically as could be expected under the circumstances, how any human ought to be dealt with in any case. The Refugee Council of Australia advances the reception of adaptable, others conscious and handy approaches towards asylum seekers and refugees in Australia and universally through directing exploration, support, and strategy investigation and network instruction. The adequacy of this non legitimate reaction is that it gives an arcuate hand to evacuees and asylum seekers to fall back on in the midst of hardship. We pay lip administration to expressions of consideration without living their existence: we sing that Australia has bounty to offer the individuals who wish to come here yet in all actuality we lock down our fringes to avoid refugees. The department of immigration will invite alyssum seekers and refugees through its humanitarian program which expects to help individuals in humanitarian need abroad for whom resettlement in another nation is the main accessible choice and agree to Australia’s worldwide commitments on shore under the Refugee Convention.

The basic issue for Australia is whether we will satisfy our notoriety for being the place that is known for the ‘Fair go’ that assists those in frantic conditions. In the second stanza of our National Anthem, we sing: ‘For those who’ve come across the seas’. We sing proudly of the liberality, welcome and solidarity we offer. This perfect stands as a glaring difference, be that as it may, to the personal circumstance, imprisonment and prohibition that have described our country’s reaction over numerous years to refuge searchers who land by boat.