A colleague of mine (and a “colleague of mind”) wanted to help us — the South East Queensland Community — with a project in urban sociology.
He wrote to the Queensland Public Service Commission (QPSC), regarding workforce profiles for the Queensland Public Service dating back to at least 1959. The QPSC replied they currently produces such profiles (short history; presentism) but have suggested that
They do not have historical records on this;
The Queensland State Archives (QSA) may be able to guide me in the right direction.
I could have expected the answer.
When my colleague sent me the QPSC answer, I rolled around the floor in hysterical laughter at the historical forgetfulness of the bureaucracy. But then I thought, or is it, that it is uncaring-ness, that their work regime is so mechanic as to cut against critical, empathetic, and creative thinking; that uncaring-ness which erases the emotion of anger coming from the public, and leaves the public with silence.
As the Public Sector Commission does not appear to value their own history — I say “appear” as I thought there was a coffee table history book for the QPSC but I found nothing from a Google search — the expectation is that us professional historians have to go to the QSA and perform research for a basic longitudinal data set, and unpaid to do so, which, in public expectations, our governments agencies and departments ought to be professional enough to have such data sets to hand.
There is a gross attitude of the 9-to-5 professionals who believe that they can wait until retirement, and then do their Ph.D., or Masters. And then to be shocked by the damage that historical forgetfulness has done for the government and society from the absence of such research in the last several decades.
The problem is also that there are too many personsin government and society who are “CHEAP”: they want something for nothing…believing it must be voluntary work…make no effort but make someone else a slave for the internalist desires. “And [blanked-out] the other person.” “I do not care”. If decision-makers cared, decisions would be made for the necessary research to be done and paid for.
No more in this 2024 election cycle (BCC and Qld). I am going to shout the message from the rooftop. The days of the economic rationalist are over, and the educated public (and we are fast growing against the elderly-and-fearful populists, and polemical and warring politicians) will no longer tolerate such mean spiritedness, and we are going to call-out such game-players to account. Game End !
Featured Image: Frederick Nietzsche’s famous essay.
Nietzsche, The Use and Abuse of History.
Another Featured Image:Â Queenslander Jack McKinney knew about the intellectual failure of Labor Governments, as well as all partisan governments.
Review Essay: Matthew Hunter, Charles Taylorâs Sublime Shortcomings: The great philosopherâs book about poetry is provocative but disappointing, The Chronicle of Higher Education, MAY 22, 2024.
Charles Taylor (2024). Â Cosmic Connections: Poetry in the Age of Disenchantment, Harvard University Press.
At a moment when, as Taylor has it, religiously inflected paradigms of thinking were being discarded â chief among them the belief that language could accurately reflect some divine order â Romantic poets and their heirs cultivated a language of what Taylor calls âreconnection,â a language which takes our âlinks with the cosmosâ and makes them âpalpable for you in a way which moves you and hence restores your link to them.â
This impulse gives the book its bursts of real intellectual excitement. At a moment when literary criticism is still beholden to a historicism that treats the language of poetry as but another symptom of more general cultural conditions, Cosmic Connections dares to treat poetic language as a unique category of communication unto itself that is as distinct as it is elusive to the understanding. Elusiveness, for Taylor, is indeed part of the point of poetry. Whereas descriptive, declarative prose hinges on matters of fact, poetry â by dint of its reliance on figuration â elaborates a different kind of knowledge. âFiguring,â as Taylor has it, âcan give insight, but it always leaves something more to be said, more about what features the object has and what it doesnât. That is why it lacks the finality and clarity that ordinary prose can attain.â
Romanticism is one theme I have written on, and specifically, the connection between romanticism and politics.
I picked up the theme in my discussion in Conscious Existence: Realistic or Romantic?  I make a claim for reality and I understand that such a claim is far too romantic. We grasp for what we individually want and it is always illusory; nevertheless, that becomes the reality of our situation. There are those behaviourists who claim that the mind, consciousness, self, is all illusion; pause and think, being all illusion makes it reality. It is the fact of the matter that the behaviourists have not awoken upon. I do not simply behave. I live. I live knowingly.
I am awake to my depressing reality. The realism, though, is that truth is in the measure. It is never that bad, that good, that ugly, that beautiful, and never that false or that true. It is measured upon an ideal horizon worldview, and the wider I make that view-in-learning the greater the hope I have. That is the insight â to embrace the depressing reality does not mean the end of hope. If we live then there is hope for further good, beauty, and truth. What it will make of you or I, cannot be said. It has to be lived. However, seeing the wide horizon worldview unfolding, that for me, is flourishing.
Romanticism is an analytic tool in my historiography. To quote, Lynn Hunt as President of the American Historical Association in May 2002:
Itâs the difference of the past that renders it a proper subject for epic, romance, or tragedy-genres preferred by many readers and students of history. The âironicâ mode of much professional history writing just leaves them cold.
Romanticism is a theme I explored in my review essay on The Great Gatsby. Before marrying Tom, Daisy had a romantic relationship with Gatsby. Her choice between Gatsby and Tom is one of the novelâs central conflicts. Fitzgeraldâs romance and life-long obsession with Ginevra King inspired the character of Daisy. There is irony in Nickâs final judgement of Jay. Jayâs character had no scruples other than his romantic vision of Daisy as the ânice girlâ. He was in the end revealed as the bootlegger in the crime network of âWolfsheimâ who is based on New York gangster, Arnold Rothstein. One of the biggest shortfalls in American modernism of the 1920s, and 1930s, was the celebration of brutal crime and thuggish characters, as if there were no significant moral or ethical judgements; only aesthetical ones. Unfortunately, there is a swing back to this kind of nasty love of criminality in our own time. Swings and round-a-abouts. For example the Ned Kelly mythology is celebrated, and then it is correctly criticised. Against the romantic illusion, such criminals destroyed lives. The character of Jay Gatsby begins as an enigma, but, as his hidden life history is revealed, he is not so much careless or ruthless, but confused of mind. After his death, Jamesâ father, Gatz senior, reveals a son who redeemed himself to the original family, making something of amends for his reckless ambition. His father had been given a house two years before Gatsbyâs untimely end. Another aspect of the carelessness is the misjudgment that Nickâs father warned about. Tom had clearly set up George to murder Gatsby under the misjudgment of both Tom and George that it was Jay at the wheel of the vehicle that killed Myrtle. If Tom and George knew that it was Daisy, the judgement would have led in another direction. In the end, it is the capacity to revaluate our judgements that matters. As a good stoic, Nickâs fatherâs approach was to suspend judgement, but that is, realistically, a temporary position. It is only the romantic who fears disillusion who refuses the need for revaluation in judgement, which means that judgement has already been secured.
The historiography of American modernism draws out several important themes: the nature of the past between what we think is modern and what came before; and the romantic recurrent past where modernism is confusingly represented as realism, but, in truth, European Enlightenment (as 20th century modernism) never escaped its Romanic roots. Fitzgerald originally, as American modernism, proposed the question of time-past: can we re-grasp what has come before? Fitzgerald is influenced by the Nietzschean ideal of history as recurrence. But then, again, the words, âhis mind would never romp again like the mind of Godâ, is striking. The phrase âmind of Godâ is romantic and mysterious. There is a strong sense that the reference is beyond the human mind. The sensible hermeneutics would guide us to merely the idea that, in the end, in death, there is stationary nothing. In the romantic mind, in life, there is a rapturous moment when time does stand still. The search for meaning has ended, not in the thought, but in simply being (or non-being).
While we are still alive we dream in a green light, something romantic. It can become a prison for the mind, if we are unaware in judgement, but Realism does not end the Ideal. How can we say what is real unless we prepared to reevaluate our hidden idealism.
In that hidden idealism is the understanding that the Romantic is the heart of local studies. To quote W.G. Hoskinsâ “English Provincial Towns in the Early Sixteenth Century” (Transactions of the Royal Historical Society, Fifth Series, Vol. 6 (1956), pp. 1-19):
The English historians have concentrated almost exclusively upon the constitutional and legal aspects of town development. They have concerned themselves with the borough rather than the town, with legal concepts rather than topography or social history, just as the agrarian historians have been pre- occupied with the manor rather than the village. Local historians of towns and villages have, with two or three notable exceptions, followed suit in this ill-balanced emphasis. The result is that we know surprisingly little about the economy, social structure, and physical growth of English towns before the latter part of the eighteenth century.
The context of the early sixteenth century might appear to have little relevance, but the themes of urban development and its social impact on the human experience is the same for late nineteenth and and early twentieth century Brisbane local history, albeit keeping in mind very distinctive differences between the political system of the different centuries. It must be borne in mind that the late nineteenth century was obsessed with medieval romanticism, and the questions of what historians of the era called the âAgrarian Revolutionâ spoke to the loss felt in the Romantic Movement.
Dr Rod Fisher, an historian at the University of Queensland in 1980s and 1990s, pioneered academic-based local history in the former Centre of Applied History. Fisher was also a specialist in Tutor and Stuart History, and thus, represented the British model of bridging sixteenth and seventh century English history with contemporary local history. The challenge for the reader is to apply the type of analysis Hoskins demonstrated for sixteenth century England in local history of late nineteenth and twentieth century Queensland.
The revolutionary feature was the motifs of the youth counterculture in the German and French Romantic traditions: coffee shops of radical thought in seedily intercity districts of student habitations. In March 1968, [Arthur] Blessitt had opened a coffee house called âHis Placeâ in a rented building next door to a topless go-go club. Ann Wilkerson had much earlier organised the first coffee houses of the Teen Challenge movement.
This is an understanding that many local historians miss, and, indeed, most Australian historians miss the thinking, since the collapse of the intellectual history âindustryâ, most thanks to the idiocy (think Dostoevsky) of the neo-liberal economy.
Featured Image: 01. Mind’s Eye of a Personal Horizon Worldview
It amazes me that the reaction thinking can swallow up social movements into the madness of the mob. Yes, when layout on a spectrum, it is only a minority position, but, in which case, the reaction thinking becomes the majority outlook through the echo chamber of the techne.
We are doing the echo chamber now in this social media environment. But there is a difference between the minority of intellectuals and the mob position. So, it is estimated that Trumpism works on a quarter of the American population. A morality of a mob which is a minority on the spectrum of the American demography. As Richard Hofstadter showed, back in the early 1960s, in the course of American history, intellectuals were/are only a minority on the spectrum. What tends to occur is schooling of intellectuals.
Even with the intellectuals of the opposite position to our own intellectualism, it at least begins, with something less than reaction thinking we see today. For myself, for example, I am strongly opposed to the position of William F. Buckley Jr., and his American Southneo-conservatism. However, I see in Buckley an intellectual position, in the 1960s, which could not be dismissed as reaction and mob thinking as Trumpism is in the 2020s.
Buckley’s earlier neo-conservativism work on a certain logic which has been skewed by Trumpism. Not x(liberalism) but y (a new conservatism). Make no mistake, though, in the context of the 1960s civil rights movement, Buckley was being reactionary, but being much smarter about it than the current mob. He formulated a new position for conservative thinking, one based on Southern State Rights and redescribed as “the Southern Way of Life“. This became the intellectual basis, over the four to five decades, to Trumpism, through the Moral Majority and the New Christian Right movements, and secularised during the late Bush administration into “Might is Right” (“USA, USA, USA“) movement.
What is needed? Conversations and agreements to the compatibilism, as I have explained in my short piece, Finding Peace from the Culture-History War: A Historiographical Message for the Times.
My concern is that we have Buckley’s Chance to turn matters around, and we are trap on the spiral of eternal return (see links above, “the spiral history theory of stupidity”; each word here has a different link in the phrase, and the same with other phrasing above).
What humans need and want of life is Peace, if also Survival and Flourishing. This is what we have to keep foremost to Mind.
Unknown photographer – “William F. Buckley Jr., The Art of Fiction No. 146” in The Paris Review. From Wikipedia.
https://www.theparisreview.org/interviews/1395/the-art-of-fiction-no-146-william-f-buckley-jr The photograph was originally published online by Reuters/National Review in 2008 and guaranteed free non-commercial use; further information can be seen in the metadata. However, as a handout photo originally, it almost certainly emerged in the 1970s with no evident copyright notice, hence the chosen licensing information.
National Review Magazine founder William F. Buckley Jr. is seen in an undated handout photo.
WHY DO WE CONTINUE TO LET POLITICIANS AND COUNCILLORS LEAD US DOWN THE PATHWAY OF FAILED POLICY?
Brisbane City Council Policy (BCC): Bus over Rail.
Queensland Government Policy: Private Financial Interest over Public.
It is interesting to think about the Sydney experience. The government’s management of both modes of transport is very poor. Bus services put in place for rail service during delayed, long, and sustained maintenance projects. I am talking about Brisbane primarily, but it is also Sydney, and Melbourne, and many cities around the world.
It is not a private versus public problem in the delivery of the transport service. It is a finance policy problem which comes from believing that we can reduce public funding and, somehow, the long-term consequences do not matter.
We are now bearing the brunt of the stupidity of neo-liberal policies (explanation here). More fool us for believing the fools in their rhetoric and promises to deliver.
We do not have to accept it. We can put candidates who fail to stand up to failed policies last at the ballot box.
Kind regards,
Neville.
Historian,
Convenor, Sociology of Education Thematic Group, The Australian Sociological Association (TASA).
President, Southern Brisbane Suburban Forum (SBSF).
Director, Brisbane Southside History Network (BSHN).
MPHA (Qld), Ph.D. (History) UQ., Grad. Dip. Arts (Philosophy) Melb., Grad. Dip. (Education) UQ.
The information in this message is confidential.
It is intended only for the named addressee.
If you are not the intended recipient, any dissemination, copying or use of any information is unauthorised.
If you have received this message in error, please immediately telephone or email me.
Sam has asked me to write a paragraph on this question because persons are troubled by horror. It is the same conventional reaction to Mary ShelleyâsFrankenstein, which is a film directed by Kenneth Branagh. Horror disturbs conventional thinking. To be a heretic is to be a proponent of heresy, which is any belief or theory that is strongly at variance with established beliefs or customs, particularly the accepted beliefs or religious law of a religious organization. Heretic Humanism is a humanism, which is a commitment to values of humanity, whereby belief and disbelief demonstrates that the values of humanity are not sufficiently located in orthodoxy belief and practice.
I would contend, like most contemporary theologians, cultural and conventional Christianity is not orthodoxy. It is controlled as an orthodox devise, but it is not actually orthodoxy, as a Christian doctrine, which says the core beliefs of faith have not changed over millennia. That is simply not true, for the very reason, that biblical and liberal hermeneutics (rules of interpretation) have both changed significantly over the centuries.
Most educated Christians are more heretics than the ancient Christians of Rome. The uneducated Christians are just idiots. The same can be said of all believers, including atheists, agnostics, materialists, and all ignorant persons who think they know more by not being educated (learning), including those who think this sentence means rejecting a believer for the act of believing. Education, Learning, Knowledge, all requiresbelief, and doubt-“unbelief” is only another form of belief.
A heretic has the opportunity to find their own humanity. This is the message of the film. Heretic is an intense, chilling, and frighteningly sincere discussion about the horror of ideas.
Heretic Humanism. Friday | November 08, Elizabeth Street Theatre
Details
Are you ready to be frighten? Are you a heretic humanist?
The HB Film group is doing something different next month, to keep you on your toes.
Heretic
Date: Friday, November 8
Time: 6:30 PM (110 minutes)
Location: Elizabeth Picture Theatre
Screen: Tara Room 1
Charity Tickets Available: 2 x ADULT
Film starts at 6:30 PM (110 minutes) at the Elizabeth Street Theatre, Brisbane City.
Gather start at 6:00 pm in foyer. Only two tickets have been prebooked. I will hold these tickets as “charity offers”. If you’re financially struggling but would like to come along, contact Neville on 0416 046 429. First in, First served. Otherwise it is recommend to prebook your own ticket, as this is a special screening: go to:
We will have supper after the film, and discuss the theme.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Erdozain, Dominic (2016). The Soul of Doubt : the religious roots of unbelief from Luther to Marx. Oxford University Press
Davis, N. J., & Robinson, R. V. (1996). Are the Rumors of War Exaggerated? Religious Orthodoxy and Moral Progressivism in America. American Journal of Sociology, 102(3), 756â787. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2782462
Henderson, John B. (1998). The Construction of Orthodoxy and Hersey, State University of New York Press.
Hilliard, David (2005). Unorthodox Christianity in South Australia, History Australia, 2:2, 38-1-38-10, DOI: 10.2104/ha050038
Kim, David W. and Duncan Wright (2024). Socio-Anthropological Approaches to Religion: Environmental Hope (Rowman & Littlefield).
Myers, B. (2008). “Following the Way Which Is Called Heresy”: Milton and the Heretical Imperative. Journal of the History of Ideas, 69(3), 375-393. Retrieved May 6, 2020, from www.jstor.org/stable/40208030
O’Connor, B. (2011). Implications of Catholic-Orthodox Engagement. Angelicum, 88(3), 741-750. Retrieved April 29, 2020, from www.jstor.org/stable/44616352
Struckmeyer, Kurt (2017). An Unorthodox Faith, Resource Publications (CA).
Vine, M., & Carey, M. (2017). Mimesis and Conspiracy: Bureaucracy, New Media and the Infrastructural Forms of Doubt. The Cambridge Journal of Anthropology, 35(2), 47â64. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26877569
Neville Buch (Pronounced Book) Ph.D. is a certified member of the Professional Historians Association (Queensland). Since 2010 he has operated a sole trade business in history consultancy. He was a Q ANZAC 100 Fellow 2014-2015 at the State Library of Queensland. Dr Buch was the PHA (Qld) e-Bulletin, the monthly state associationâs electronic publication, and was a member of its Management Committee. He is the Managing Director of the Brisbane Southside History Network.
We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue to use this site we will assume that you are happy with it.Ok