I noted yesterday the interest in Australian PM Kevin Rudd that has been bringing people to this site. It predictably continued after that post. That interest caused me to dig around and see what was being said about the man.
Of course the fires in Australia have been holding people's attention. Rudd silently weeping on TV impressed even cynical reporters: Rudd's human face. Writing on his BBC blog of Rudd's response to the terrible fires that have been engulfing Australia, BBC's reporter in Australia Nick Bryant noted:
He has now called for a day of mourning to help the nation process this tragedy: Kevin Rudd calls national day of mourning for Victorian bushfires
Odd that for many he is seen as a technocrat. For that is not what comes out in the act he is best known for, his speech apologising on behalf of Australia's government to the stolen generation, his first substantive act on assuming government. Full Text of Kevin Rudd's Sorry Speech. It is a masterpiece of a true apology in the context of politics, an apology that opens up new horizons for both former oppressed and oppressor. I have written of Kevins Rudd's Sorry Speech, as well as various stories as this apology was anticipated.
A truly gracious act is remembered - and celebrated by artists among others. His words were incorporated into a song: In Australia, From Apology, a Hit Song Grows.
Actress Cate Blanchett wrote of him, Kevin Rudd, in the Leaders and Revolutionary section of the 2008 Time Top 100:
For me, Kevin Rudd's quality as a leader is best illustrated by his apology to the "stolen generations" of Aborigines. ... It was a watershed moment: the Parliament building was filled with Aborigines; the grounds overflowed with many more people, and there were gatherings in every major city. Most Australians felt as I did, that wrongs were put right. We all felt our government had provided us the space to begin again. This unreserved apology will pave the way for genuine reconciliation between the nation's first peoples and nonindigenous Australians.
Rudd represents a new generation of political leaders who have what I would regard as a mature Christian philosophy of politics that is inclusive of others rather than doctrinaire and divisive. Rudd wrote an important summary of his Christian political philosophy in an essay in Faith in Politics in December 2006. In it he writes of the impact on his thought of the writings and life of Dietrich Bonhoeffer. He writes of ‘What is Meant By Telling the Truth', the final chapter from his Ethics:
On the church's voice on behalf of the marginalised:
I argue that a core, continuing principle shaping this engagement should be that Christianity, consistent with Bonhoeffer's critique in the '30s, must always take the side of the marginalised, the vulnerable and the oppressed. As noted above, this tradition is very much alive in the prophetic literature of the Old Testament. It is also very much alive in the recorded accounts of Jesus of Nazareth: his engagement with women, gentiles, tax collectors, prostitutes and the poor - all of whom, in the political and social environment of first-century Palestine, were fully paid-up members of the "marginalised, the vulnerable and the oppressed". Furthermore, parallel to this identification with those "below" was Jesus' revulsion at what he described as the hypocrisy of the religious and political elites of his time, that is, those who were "above".
Do these principles of themselves provide a universal moral precept from which all elements of social and economic policy can be derived? Of course not. But they do provide an illuminating principle - even a "light on the hill", to borrow Chifley's phrase, which he in turn had consciously borrowed from Christ's Sermon on the Mount - that can help to shape our view of what constitutes appropriate policy for the community, the nation and the world.
He rejects simplistic and crude forms of Christian political engagement ("Vote for me because I am a Christian, vote for me because I have a defined set of views on questions of private sexual morality, and vote for me also because I chant the political mantra of "family values"; or differing or more complex forms of thre same), and seeks to develop a consistent Christian political philosophy. Having done that he turns to the big global issues: poverty, climate change, militant Islam and global terror, immigration and asylum seekers - and the consequent challenge of integration. Having earlier rejected violence by the state against other states he has this to say about the war on terror:
... How would Bonhoeffer respond to militant Islamism and the broader challenge of international terrorism today? Unlike climate change and global poverty, where there is a gaping silence in the national debate, when the topic turns to terrorism the political cacophony is deafening. But much of this noise is made up of the soundbites that are part of the colour, movement and superficiality of contemporary Australian politics. Islamic terrorism is a complex phenomenon that demands an integrated, complex response. An appreciation of complexity is not a recipe for inertia. It should instead be a recipe for effective rather than rhetorical action.
Bonhoeffer's voice, speaking to us through the ages, would ask this simple, truth-based question: what is causing this phenomenon? He would also caution against inflammatory rhetoric that seeks to gain political advantage, rather than to respond substantively and find a way forward. Of discomfort to certain elements of the far Left would be the truthful conclusion that there is a fundamental problem within militant Islamism, which values violent jihad in its own right and is not amenable to engagement, dialogue or persuasion. Of discomfort to the Right is the conclusion that the politics of economic underdevelopment in much of the Islamic world breeds resentment, denies opportunity and therefore provides fertile recruitment fields for jihadists. The World Bank gives us the unsettling statistic that an extra 80-100 million jobs will need to be created in the decade ahead if the current level of unemployment for young males in the Muslim world is not to deteriorate further.
Refreshingly realistic and non-doctrinaire: What is causing this phenomenon? It is complex. And it demands action , not words or empty gesture.
In his conclusion to the essay he again cites Bonhoeffer:
A new generation of leadership. Open, reflective, inclusive. Postmodern even. Not rolling over and accepting defeat as so many expected. Maybe like Obama, though Obama may not be quite so quick to call his political philosophy Christian. But there are many smilarities, including the influence of Jim Wallis. Rudd quotes Wallis' "God's Politics", at the beginning of his Faith in Politics essay:
I see similarities here: Defining evil and dealing with evil . And, as I wrote here just after his election, Rudd and Obama - walking a similar path? , I still dare to hope that Obama, albeit from a different position, will be able to see the USA freed from the racism that still prowls its corridors - though very quietly nowadays.
Whatever, for those who would suggest that Rudd and Obama do not represent a Christian politics, I would urge embrace rather than opposition to their governments. There is room, there is a listening ear, and there is a future hope. ( A different response to that Andrew Sullivan's commented on in the Sunday Times yesterday: Republican Taliban declare jihad on Obama: The president wants bipartisanship; the right has promised him all-out war )
So for those who came here searching for Kevin Rudd I hope this is of interest! Take a look around at the site while you are here. I guess this will show high up on google for a few days, maybe longer. I will probably not be writing about Rudd again unless he does something of note, but he certainly impresses me. And while I am still unsure what he said about Islam recently that has stirred interest, what I cited above is both wise and cautious.
Comments