Aung San Suu Kyi: Her words strike the tone of what is to follow; establishing the structure, purpose and goals of what is hoped will be achieved. References’ to the United Nations and the “international Year of Tolerance” give added authority to what is being said. It provides an international context for the issues being raised and greater sense of urgency for what is being advocated, Aung San also effectively uses her “own experience” in campaigning for human rights and power sharing in Burma, to “emphasize the positive aspect of tolerance. The speaker establishes her purpose in the opening paragraph, “ I want to try and vice some of the common hopes which firmly unite us in all our splendid diversity. ” This is reference to “common hopes” acknowledges the collaborative entity of this conference, described as “the greatest concourse of women. ” Unity is evident in her use of inclusive language “us” and “our” which reinforces that she is there as a spokesperson of note. The female audience is acknowledged by her humor “joined by a few brave men”.
Her goal goes beyond just national boundaries however for she also wants to secure “freedom from want and freedom from war” in order to alleviate the evils of “sexual slavery”, “constant humiliation and ill-treatment”. Positive connotations are used to describe tolerance as representing “broad-mindedness and vision” predicated on a confidence that enables “new challenges” to be met without the need for either “intransigence or violence. ” Aung San is arguing for female equality in terms of justified inclusion rather than any over overthrown of current male dominance, societal transformation rather than evolution.
She emphasizes that even where “the home is the domain of the woman” there is no security to ensure that she can consider the home as a “haven” or a refuge where she can “be safe and unmolested”. [this can refer to aboriginal land, how it is used against them also] Peace is a key goal, but the speaker stresses the difficulty of achieving it. “Where there is no security there can be no lasting peace”. [maybe use this as your conclusion] She was a released prisoner of “house arrest” which was the reason “why” she is not speaking in person.
This establishes the recurring motif of ‘freedom’ versus restraint, confinement and limitation which underpins much of what follows. [use in opening] ‘Freedom’ and ‘community’ are frequently repeated, which gives an unified structure to the whole speech. She uses assertive tone to indicate that progress has been made but counters that by arguing that “there still remain many obstacles to overcome”. This emphasizes the need for continued determination.
Current intolerance and patriarchal domination is juxtaposed with a modernized mindset reflecting the “revolutionary changes in social values” instigated by the “technological revolution” and restraint globalization. Faith Bandler She is a highly respected civil rights activist who has campaigned against social and political inequality and indigenous justice and disadvantage. “My belief is in these people. I fix my faith in people. I’m a great believer in the power of people” The turn of the millennium was contentious for indigenous issues, shown in her reference to “terrible utterances in the name of free speech”.
She goes on to refer to recent comments that have caused “shame and anger” and point out that such things “stand in the way of the planning of good strategies. ” Her purpose is therefore to give her thoughts on what has gone before as well as her views of what is happening now, “my thoughts of these days and the days before. ” Her comments are naturally subjective for she is speaking from personal experience about issues that have seriously impacted on her people. She wants to sketch the efforts of those who have struggled so hard to improve ndigenous rights but she also wants to show t hat there are those who deliberately turn a blind eye to the past. This ‘sight’ imagery is effective because she talks metaphorically of “ignorance” and “blindness to other peoples’ way of life”. Faith talks about her own difficulty in fathoming the “millions… who are hungry… who are homeless… who are without work. ” She also talks about those who are “wrongfully imprisoned” [maybe use this as the intro], tortured and murdered. The dimensions of suffering on the basis of “differences” are incomprehensible [link this to the aborigines].
She had asked herself, “why is it so hard to find our commonalities? ” she cites prejudice and a tendency to be condemnatory rather than give praise to those who “patiently bear the brunt of many misdeeds and indecencies. ” She specifically addresses the “you” within her audience when she refer to the “struggle to reconcile” in order to lighten “the burden of that terrible baggage that has to do with our differences. ” She mentions the active and violent dispossession of land, describing the loss of life, “fierce battles and conflict. ”
Faith begins by acknowledging and thanking her audience but quickly assers that she is saddened because little real reconciliation progress seems to have been made since 1967, regardless of what has been revealed about the “terrible tragedy” of the “stolen children”. [ start with this] Major changes in the treatment of indigenous Australians are outlined with references to the White Australian Policy, and the decade long struggle “for aboriginal citizenship rights”. She stresses that rights have to be won and that appreciations must be shown for what has been fought for and won in the past.
