The real threat to ‘social cohesion’ is the ongoing genocide of Palestine


Over the past 6 months, the diarrhoea tsunami that is Australian political discourse found its new favourite meaningless phrase: ‘social cohesion’.

Those who use the phrase claim that it is about maintaining a respectful society, so we can all come together around the campfire at the end of the day and sing Kumbaya. Oddly enough, the ongoing genocide, which is attempting to wipe out an entire society, does not seem to count as a ‘threat to social cohesion’. Just the protests against it. 

The term has gained steam in the last two months, reaching its peak a month ago when ‘Teal’ MP Sophie Scamps used it in Parliament so that the Prime Minister and the Opposition Leader could have a chance to rant about the alleged ‘threats to social cohesion’ seen around the country: protesters and anyone else who criticises the government over their lack of action regarding the ongoing genocide in Palestine.

Throughout those speeches, as well as many others from Anthony Albanese, Penny Wong and whoever the fuck Peter Khalil is, the message is simple: ‘People are spreading misinformation to destroy our social cohesion.’

Even when the so-called ‘misinformation’ is true (like Australia being involved in the weapons trade with Israel), the media is happily repeating Labor’s gaslighting like dogs doing tricks for their owners hoping to get a little pat on the head at the Midwinter Ball.

‘Social cohesion’ is just another term for the status quo used by people who know the status quo is broken. 

Asking the government to not be beholden to the American military industrial complex? That breaks the status quo. Asking them to actually sanction their ‘good friend’ Israel for the war crimes they are committing? That breaks ‘social cohesion’.

Someone who disrupted the status quo last week was Senator Fatima Payman, when she dared to vote in favour of acknowledging that Palestine exists now instead of when Albanese wants to, which is maybe sometime in the future when the people trying to wipe Palestine off the planet say it’s ok. 

Following the vote, she was backgrounded hard by Labor in conjunction with the media. We saw the Lattoufing of a senator in real time. Yet another Muslim woman being villainized by powerful racists. Further proof that what happened to Yassmin Abdel-Magied can happen to anyone. Well, anyone who isn’t a powerful cis, straight, white, able-bodied man, of course.

The backgrounding went so far as to push against her ability to be a senator now that she is no longer a Labor senator. 

The reason she has dual citizenship is that there was no way to renounce her Afghan citizenship without going as a former refugee woman turned politician to the Taliban for approval. Something only a blatantly racist fuckwit would tell the media that she should have to do just because she voted with a conscience.

There were headlines trying to scare people about her faith and claims that she’s plotting to lead a ‘Muslim Party’ ‘bringing religion into politics’ in a way that Albanese and Dutton both said was a ‘threat to social cohesion’. Despite Albanese openly talking about his religion, a christian prayer at the start of Parliamentary sessions and numerous already existing outwardly Christian parties in the political landscape.

Interestingly Labor doesn’t seem to think religion in politics ‘threatened social cohesion’ when it was the reason Labor voted against same-sex marriage – something they reminded us of when they bizarrely bragged about it as part of their attacks on Payman. 

Stoking Islamophobia for cheap political points in a way that genuinely hurts thousands of Australians was of course deemed by those who dictate the term ‘social cohesion’ as defending the cohesion, despite clearly doing the opposite.

Interestingly while Payman was a threat to the ‘social cohesion’ for going against Labor’s official stance in Parliament, MP Josh Burns wasn’t accused of going breaking ‘social cohesion’ when he slammed Labor’s stance and the UN in Parliament regarding the potential of the UN considering adding Palestine as a member state. 

It’s only breaking ‘social cohesion’ when the actions are Pro-Palestine, when anyone else speaks up, even if they are being inflammatory, it is simply ‘voicing concern’.

Of course The Australian had to come in with their own racism when Paul Kelly wrote: “Payman has broken the unwritten rules of multiculturalism.” 

Multiculturalism is only multiculturalism when you accept multiple cultures, it’s in the name. But when Kelly said that he was saying the quiet part out loud: in Australia, the ‘rules’ for acceptance of women of colour are to sit down, shut up and do what the powerful white man says.

That is what those in power mean when they say ‘social cohesion’. They don’t mean striving for an actually cohesive society, they mean the unquestioning support of powerful cis, straight, able-bodied, white men while they impose their bigoted status quo.

If their version of ‘social cohesion’ involves the silencing of minorities and the continual shrugging at genocide, then their ‘social cohesion’ can get fucked. 

Society can not be held together by inflicting pain onto large communities in desperate need. For us to have actual ‘social cohesion’, the genocide, the lies and the bigotry must end. 

Those are the REAL threats to social cohesion.

More like this