Why have we forgotten the art of empathy and compromise?

REASON and understanding are dead — we’d rather scream at each other than concede a point, whether it’s over statues or the Constitution writes Rachel Corbett.

THE impact of tearing down confederate statues in the United States has been felt here in Australia as indigenous broadcaster, Stan Grant called for Aussies to look at our own historical monuments and assess whether there might be some room for improvement.

Referring specifically to the statue of Captain Cook in Sydney’s Hyde Park, Grant suggested the inscription that states Cook “discovered” Australia should be changed to something that doesn’t negate the existence of a community who’d been here for over 60,000 years before Cook set foot in the place.

Not a bad point… you’d think. But as with everything in this debate no one can be bothered wasting time hanging out on reasonable ground when there’s way more fun to be had in the vast fields of shouty outrage.

People who disagreed with Grant’s version of the facts suggested Cook did “discover” Australia... for the British Empire and therefore the inscription should be left as it is. If we’re playing a game of semantics that’s a pretty clever move but it’s also another example of both sides being more interested in winning the argument than admitting there’s even a hint of merit in the views of their opponents.

At no point did Grant suggest we should take to our historical monuments with an angle grinder. He was merely raising the question of whether the inscription, which wouldn’t have raised a single eyebrow when it was unveiled in the 1800s, might be ready for an update, considering how times have changed.

You’d think we’d be intelligent and reasonable enough to hear comments like these and think “hmmm, maybe we could think about changing it?” Instead the predictable frenzy is whipped up and the conversation is stuck circulating on the extremes.

People claim Grant is trying to wipe out history and in response, Grant says this backlash is his opponent’s way of saying “know your place.” And just like that we’re going absolutely nowhere.

If this is how we consistently approach this topic we’ve got Buckley’s of coming anywhere near unity. If we’re all intent on refusing to acknowledge the grievances of the other side how are we ever supposed to reach a middle ground?

Stan Grant did not call for the statue of Captain Cook to be removed, he suggested its inscription could use an update. (Pic: Supplied)

Those who believe the indigenous community should ‘get over it and move on’ are clearly ignorant of the significant wounds that exist as a result of a fight to be recognised that is still going on today. It shouldn’t be impossible to feel empathy when you haven’t experienced something yourself and this isn’t an unfortunate one off event that happened 200 years ago with no further consequences. It’s 2017 and among other things we’re still arguing about whether indigenous people should be recognised in the Constitution, so surely it’s understandable why for some, despite the passage of time, the wounds still feel fresh.

Similarly, those who believe the only solution is to get rid of Australia Day along with any statue that represents a less than admirable past need to stop accusing people who believe Australia Day should stay where it is of being white supremacists.

Is there not somewhere in between these two extremes?

Is it not possible for people on the right of the issue to try and understand why this might still be painful for some members of the Australian community? And is it not possible for people on the left to see the irony of complaining about wiping out one version of history while simultaneously trying to wipe out another?

We can’t change anything about the way this nation was founded but we can change how we recognise the past and how we treat each other as we try to move forward.

Surely we can get to a place where we can still celebrate the events that have led to Australia being one of the most prosperous nations in the world while acknowledging the struggles indigenous people have had to face.

If Stan Grant keeps going the way he is in relation to AUS history and monuments he’ll go the same way as Yassmin Abdel-Magied #auspol

— Alan Jones (@AlanJones) August 23, 2017

Nothing is achieved by hearing a view from the other side and refusing to give it a moment’s consideration before flying off the handle. Winning doesn’t always mean walking away with everything and leaving the other side with nothing. And suggesting an outdated inscription might need changing doesn’t mean you want to tear down the fabric of society and take us back to 1769.

In every aspect of life these days we seem so desperate to attach ourselves to distinct labels and clear points of view. We’re obsessed with things being black and white even though we know life exists almost exclusively in the grey. Nobody is all right or all wrong. Not the indigenous community, not those of us who’ve reaped the benefits of being white Australians. No one. But the idea that we can’t look over the divide at each other and see the humanity sitting across from us is ridiculous.

There is nothing to be gained from telling the indigenous community it’s time to get over it, just like there’s nothing to be gained from telling patriotic Australian’s that they’re somehow responsible for the sins of the past or that their patriotism is an example of white pride. Neither of those arguments encourage the other side to give up any ground and if we’re ever going to find a way to share our future we have to work out how to do it together.

@RachelCorbett