Abbott’s War On Boat People In Historical Context

Image via

Despite the fact that there are 32 times more asylum seekers arriving by plane, that seeking asylum is a right guaranteed by the United Nations, that the United Nations Human Rights Commission has called our refugee detention “cruel” and “inhuman”, and that the US State Department has confirmed Indonesia’s institutionalised violation of human rights, it’s clear that Prime Minister Tony Abbott’s focus on “illegals” who come here by boat is the right thing to do.

In fact, the only thing that should be of concern is the fact that he used the term “war” the other day in reference to the situation. My worry is this: wars are supposed to have some sort of end point. Even the Hundred Years War eventually came to a close, despite the ridiculous title they decided to give it when it began. But declaring war against a profession like people smuggling is putting yourself in an unwinnable position from word go.

So before we get mired in an intractable conflict against an intangible concept, I’d like to run through some similar declarations in the hopes that Tony will see this and understand what a terrible idea it is. After all, those who forget history are condemned to declare war on it.

Image via

The War on Drugs

The “War on Drugs” was designed to galvanise American citizens against all illicit substances, demonising marijuana as a “gateway drug” in much the same way that Poland is now considered a “gateway country”. The problem was that Americans were the ones buying all of the drugs, so they were basically fighting the war against themselves. So exactly how is this war supposed to end? Well, Colorado has just legalised marijuana, so that should give you some idea. The intangible concepts always win.

The Lesson: Legalising things is a great way to put an end to made-up wars. Also, everyone’s forgotten how great Steven Soderbergh’s Traffic was. Just FYI.

Image via

The War on Terror

America’s war on this vague emotion was as hopeless as the French War on Ennui, which they also sadly lost. The attacks on 9/11 weren’t committed by a single country, but by a group of “individuals” from a “region” rich in “oil”. So, fuelled by anger and a directionless thirst for justice, the US was able to cleverly mire itself in an intractable, unending war that can only finish once the concept of “terror” is obliterated.

The Lesson: We’d be better off declaring war on Indonesia. It’s a dumb idea, but at least there’d be an end point.

Image via

The War on Christmas

Still in America: they sure love war, huh? But this one is interesting because nobody has actually declared this war, nor is anyone waging it. This war was dreamed up by the people who feel as if they’re on the other end of it. By imagining a fictitious war fought against a holiday, we get to see this strange phenomenon from the other side. Faceless, imagined enemies and fictitious battle lines prove that the paranoia cuts both ways. And isn’t that what Christmas is all about?

The Lesson: Made-up wars being waged against you can be even more effective than made-up wars you yourself are waging. We should try claiming people smugglers are waging a war on not being a people smuggler.

Image via

The Waugh on Cricket

I know all of the examples have been American thus far, but the only home-grown example I could come up with is to do with cricket. Because cricket has rules. It has a timeline and structure. Test cricket actually ends, even though it rarely feels that way when you’re watching it. Remember the 2002 South African match when Steve Waugh declared with Australia 7-652? Me neither. But it seems like the perfect opportunity for a Yakov Smirnoff token of wisdom: “In America, you declare war. In Australia, Waugh declares you!”

The Lesson: Using this sort of sporting reference and meaningless word play is a great way to further distract the Australian public and human rights watchers. Hey, did you hear we got the Ashes back?

Image via

The War On Stars

If you don’t mind me using examples from a long time ago in a place far, far away, the Empire had a similar problem with unauthorised ships, and was even prepared to shoot them down if life signs were detected. But declaring war on the stars themselves didn’t fare well for the Empire, which was taken down by a bunch of illegal immigrants who may have looked harmless and photogenic, but were clearly terrorists who palled around with Ewoks and gay robots.

The Lesson: Star Wars Episode VII is being directed by JJ Abrams, who is notorious for keeping every single element of his operations under the strictest of secrecy. He’s like Hollywood’s Scott Morrison. We should call him.

As Tony has correctly pointed out, being in a state of war means that certain information must be kept secret, lest it fall into the hands of the enemy. What he doesn’t understand is that by treating this situation like a war, it means we, the Australian public, won’t get to find out what’s—

Ohhhh. Sorry, the penny just dropped. Disregard!

Follow Lee on Twitter: @leezachariah