4 ms·

Inside Australia's Covid Internment Camp

14 points by _dain_ 5y ago

ggm 5y ago
It would be interesting to see a discussion of how other Australians feel about this write up. I think its quite unbalanced. Anyone who doesn't want to do something which they are directed to do can build up a picture of oppression. This is not a concentration camp, and she wasn't sentenced, and the article points out of her own volition she misled authorities about her test status. It is an internment camp. It is used for both voluntary and involuntary internment/quarantine. Our response to the pandemic deserves criticism. I think this person misjudges community expectations quite severely. The NT has some of the most vulnerable people, a large aboriginal population with significant co-morbidities. If C19 got into the wider community in the NT, which is per-capita under-funded and lacks significant healthcare investments of the southern states, it would be a disaster. Would home quarantine have worked? Probably. I might add that based on this writing, I would have seriously questioned this individuals personal commitment to stick to the obligations of home quarantine, which I know is judgemental of me. Howard Springs pre-dates the pandemic: An accommodation facility named Manigurr-ma Village was built at Howard Springs in 2012 by Japanese energy company Inpex to accommodate up to 3500 temporary fly-in fly-out construction workers on the Ichthys LNG gas plant.[10] The facility was closed and abandoned in 2018. It consists of demountables, and has had post-pandemic modifications such as fencing, segregation of areas within the complex, additional health facilities. I do not imagine it is a nice place to be overall (although, for the refugees locked up in detention by Australia for over 8 years, it might be heaven by comparison with their experiences) I don't like the current federal government, I didn't vote for them and I think they are morally bankcrupt. Howard Springs is not the evidence, or related to that.
- exodust 5y ago
  > "Anyone who doesn't want to do something which they are directed to do can build up a picture of oppression." Likewise you can dismiss anyone's protest about anything if you frame their position as merely "not wanting to do what they were told". She was not flying in from somewhere needing to quarantine. She was a resident, who happened to be a close contact of a positive case. That is not grounds for being taken away in a van for 14 days quarantine. The health directive should have been as follows: "Hello, you've been identified as a close contact of -- and are required to immediately get tested and self-isolate until you receive a positive result". That's it. No need to ask questions about what she's done recently, just tell her to get tested and call back next day if she hasn't done it. Easy. No need to drag people away in unmarked vans.
- _dain_ 5y ago
  No, she wasn't sentenced, nor even charged with a crime. Yet she was still told to pack her bags, get in a van to be driven to an unfamiliar place, and then was not permitted to leave until the authorities said so. That's about as straightforward a violation of rights and dignity as it can get. So what if she lied about taking a test? As if that justifies even 1% of it? >Would home quarantine have worked? Probably. I might add that based on this writing, I would have seriously questioned this individuals personal commitment to stick to the obligations of home quarantine, which I know is judgemental of me. Mere suspicion is not grounds to imprison someone for 14 days.
  - monkeydreams 5y ago
    She was being held on a health order. While she does her best to misrepresent that, this is not a criminal arrest and so suspicion is not required. She is a known close contact and was requires to isolate. In the NT, for obvious reasons, they are not going to take people at their word.
    - peteradio 5y ago
      "For our health" is a dangerously low burden in countries with a history of mass subjugation. No clue how Australian's view their own history though.
      - ggm 5y ago
        Oh, generally with cynicism. Aus voted against conscription in WW1 and we have an innate distrust of politicians. But we also find American reductive libertarianism silly, oppose guns, and don't view the quarantine camps as universally bad. We're racist. We had a white Australia policy, we excluded people on race and language for decades, we had to vote in 1968 to give citizenship to aborigines, our press was famously anti-asian beyond the Hearst yellow press. You can't teach us about slavery, we did it too. (Kanaka blackbirding) We are partially in denial about our racist history, and detention of refugees. That's a far bigger problem than a public health emergency temporary constraint on civil liberties. 40% of Australians are migrants, or second generation of migrants, many from oppressive regimes and war. Many of us know people badly affected by quarantine rules. They are also unquestionably popular, and backed by more people than oppose them. There are many godwins-law comparison risks in camps, but we generally avoid them because they have WiFi and are shared by voluntary residents as well as recalcitrant subject to health law controls. A tiny number of people have had to stay beyond 14 days because of reinfection risks. We don't have lateral flow tests in widespread use. It is arguably a mistake, home quarantine should be fine. To repeat what I said above: I hate this government but these camps are not why, and very very few Australians view these camps as an assault on civil liberties in the wide. The performance demonstrations are not widely supported any more than the proud boys are in the USA. We are a literate, actively voting (its, mandatory voting with low bar to invalid ballot if you want) and we're not sheep, although Australians are more conformist than the popular image of sweary rebels. If you want to understand Australian attitudes to our history find "Babakiueria" (1986) on video, and then also look for recent lamb marketing videos (seriously: hunt 'australia day lamb ad 2021')

14 points by _dain_ 5y ago

ggm 5y ago

It would be interesting to see a discussion of how other Australians feel about this write up. I think its quite unbalanced. Anyone who doesn't want to do something which they are directed to do can build up a picture of oppression. This is not a concentration camp, and she wasn't sentenced, and the article points out of her own volition she misled authorities about her test status. It is an internment camp. It is used for both voluntary and involuntary internment/quarantine. Our response to the pandemic deserves criticism. I think this person misjudges community expectations quite severely. The NT has some of the most vulnerable people, a large aboriginal population with significant co-morbidities. If C19 got into the wider community in the NT, which is per-capita under-funded and lacks significant healthcare investments of the southern states, it would be a disaster. Would home quarantine have worked? Probably. I might add that based on this writing, I would have seriously questioned this individuals personal commitment to stick to the obligations of home quarantine, which I know is judgemental of me. Howard Springs pre-dates the pandemic: An accommodation facility named Manigurr-ma Village was built at Howard Springs in 2012 by Japanese energy company Inpex to accommodate up to 3500 temporary fly-in fly-out construction workers on the Ichthys LNG gas plant.[10] The facility was closed and abandoned in 2018. It consists of demountables, and has had post-pandemic modifications such as fencing, segregation of areas within the complex, additional health facilities. I do not imagine it is a nice place to be overall (although, for the refugees locked up in detention by Australia for over 8 years, it might be heaven by comparison with their experiences) I don't like the current federal government, I didn't vote for them and I think they are morally bankcrupt. Howard Springs is not the evidence, or related to that.

exodust 5y ago
> "Anyone who doesn't want to do something which they are directed to do can build up a picture of oppression." Likewise you can dismiss anyone's protest about anything if you frame their position as merely "not wanting to do what they were told". She was not flying in from somewhere needing to quarantine. She was a resident, who happened to be a close contact of a positive case. That is not grounds for being taken away in a van for 14 days quarantine. The health directive should have been as follows: "Hello, you've been identified as a close contact of -- and are required to immediately get tested and self-isolate until you receive a positive result". That's it. No need to ask questions about what she's done recently, just tell her to get tested and call back next day if she hasn't done it. Easy. No need to drag people away in unmarked vans.
_dain_ 5y ago
No, she wasn't sentenced, nor even charged with a crime. Yet she was still told to pack her bags, get in a van to be driven to an unfamiliar place, and then was not permitted to leave until the authorities said so. That's about as straightforward a violation of rights and dignity as it can get. So what if she lied about taking a test? As if that justifies even 1% of it? >Would home quarantine have worked? Probably. I might add that based on this writing, I would have seriously questioned this individuals personal commitment to stick to the obligations of home quarantine, which I know is judgemental of me. Mere suspicion is not grounds to imprison someone for 14 days.
- monkeydreams 5y ago
  She was being held on a health order. While she does her best to misrepresent that, this is not a criminal arrest and so suspicion is not required. She is a known close contact and was requires to isolate. In the NT, for obvious reasons, they are not going to take people at their word.
  - peteradio 5y ago
    "For our health" is a dangerously low burden in countries with a history of mass subjugation. No clue how Australian's view their own history though.
    - ggm 5y ago
      Oh, generally with cynicism. Aus voted against conscription in WW1 and we have an innate distrust of politicians. But we also find American reductive libertarianism silly, oppose guns, and don't view the quarantine camps as universally bad. We're racist. We had a white Australia policy, we excluded people on race and language for decades, we had to vote in 1968 to give citizenship to aborigines, our press was famously anti-asian beyond the Hearst yellow press. You can't teach us about slavery, we did it too. (Kanaka blackbirding) We are partially in denial about our racist history, and detention of refugees. That's a far bigger problem than a public health emergency temporary constraint on civil liberties. 40% of Australians are migrants, or second generation of migrants, many from oppressive regimes and war. Many of us know people badly affected by quarantine rules. They are also unquestionably popular, and backed by more people than oppose them. There are many godwins-law comparison risks in camps, but we generally avoid them because they have WiFi and are shared by voluntary residents as well as recalcitrant subject to health law controls. A tiny number of people have had to stay beyond 14 days because of reinfection risks. We don't have lateral flow tests in widespread use. It is arguably a mistake, home quarantine should be fine. To repeat what I said above: I hate this government but these camps are not why, and very very few Australians view these camps as an assault on civil liberties in the wide. The performance demonstrations are not widely supported any more than the proud boys are in the USA. We are a literate, actively voting (its, mandatory voting with low bar to invalid ballot if you want) and we're not sheep, although Australians are more conformist than the popular image of sweary rebels. If you want to understand Australian attitudes to our history find "Babakiueria" (1986) on video, and then also look for recent lamb marketing videos (seriously: hunt 'australia day lamb ad 2021')