Some links to holiday reading which emphasises two
different takes on the ongoing impact of Indigenous peoples in Japan over the longue durée.
First, a recent article from
the Japan Times (h/t Marginal Revolution) which examines the renaissance
of Jomon semiotics, particularly tattoos and ceramic designs (link here).
Second, an academic take by archaeologists
Peter Bleed and Akira Matsui from 2010 on Jomon ecological practices and their
implications for the wider theorising on the development of agriculture (link here).
I find these articles
interesting both for the comparative perspectives they offer on Indigenous
peoples economic and cultural practices both past and present; but also as
counterbalance to the excessively short term perspectives of most policy making
related to Indigenous peoples.
Thinking about these issues
raises important questions in the Australian public policy context. What is the
long term policy vision for Indigenous Australia? How do policymakers with short
term spans of tenure and influence deal with long term issues? Are there institutional
structures that might assist in embedding longer term perspectives? Or are we
happy to see long term policy made via a series of erratic and potentially contradictory
short term policy approaches? Is public policy formulation inevitably and
invariably short term in nature?
These are questions rarely
asked and never answered. What does that say about the quality of our public policy
discourse?
No comments:
Post a Comment