Anti-N.T. intervention mural

The mural was painted on the front of the Melbourne Anarchist Resource Centre, and was painted over the next day. This happened because whoever did it did not approach the group that runs the space (Melbourne Anarchist Club) who have been debating about the appropriation of indigenous symbols by white people. If who-ever did it had approached MAC and with the reasons why they would like to paint the rollerdoor it may well still be up

Its funny that an anarchist group would have such a property rights approach to graffiti. I mean who gave you the right over that property anyway, the state? Probably not the local indigenous custodians i'm guessin.
So lets all sit round talking about white people appropriating indigenous symbols (i'm guessin your all white folk, most of you are) and then the moment some rascal graffiti artist paints up an indigenous mural on your nice white roller door you get up in a huff and paint over it the very next day.
Beacause really, how dare they paint a mural on your rollerdoor without asking you. YOUR nice rollerdoor, on YOUR nice building, without asking YOU! But on who's land is your building? Did you ask THEM if you can put it there?

And by the way, if you need someone to explain the reason why they would paint such a thing on your door, sorry mate but you must be a bit dense.
It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure it out, it written on the friggen mural!
The reason why? really! Haven't you read a thing about whats going on in the N.T.? I think its pretty friggen clear...

Anonymous,

You appear to assume that it is unreasonable for an anarchist group, such as MAC, to determine for itself how it would like the frontage of its property to appear. I think that a reasonable argument could be made that this is not, in fact, an unreasonable proposition. Thus other images that have appeared on the roller door at MARC have also been removed, on the basis that these images do not represent or reflect the wishes of the anarchists who occupy the space. The fact that there is such a thing as property law, or that this law is administered by the state, does not alter this fact.

Regarding the image itself:

"The Australian Aboriginal Flag was designed by artist Harold Thomas (a Luritja/Wompei) man and was first flown at Victoria Square in Adelaide, SA, on National Aborigines Day, 12 July 1971.

It became the official flag for the Aboriginal Tent Embassy in Canberra after it was first flown there in 1972.

Since then, it has become a widely recognised symbol of the unity and identity of Aboriginal people.

In view of the flag’s wide acceptance and importance in Australian society, the Commonwealth took steps in 1994 to give the flag legal recognition. After a period of public consultation, the Aboriginal flag was proclaimed a ‘Flag of Australia’ under section 5 of the Flags Act 1953 in July 1995.

In 1997 the Federal Court recognised Harold Thomas as the author of the flag.

The Australian Aboriginal Flag is protected under copyright and may be reproduced only in accordance with the provisions of the Copyright Act 1968 or with the permission of Harold Thomas. Contact details for Mr Thomas are:

* Mr Harold Thomas
* PO Box 41807
* Casuarina NT 0810."

Whoever was responsible for painting the mural did not ask MAC, or Harold Thomas, if their use of his design was appropriate, and received neither party's assent in doing so. Obviously, this is not an issue for those responsible for painting the mural -- they are and remain anonymous.

However, unlike the muralists, MARC is not anonymous, and MAC bears both a legal and political responsibility for what appears on its frontage. It is also located in Northcote, approximately 1km from the HQ of the Aborigines Advancement League (Watt St.), and in an area of Melbourne with a relatively high proportion of indigenous residents (and many other Aboriginal organisations).

The MAC is not an indigenous association, but an anarchist one. It would appear to be the opinion of MAC that it should not appropriate such imagery without the permission of Harold Thomas, and even then only in consultation with the local indigenous community. Failure to do so risks not only the nature of the MARC -- which is an anarchist space, not an Aboriginal association -- being misunderstood by passers-by, but may be read as evidence of a lack of respect for both Harold Thomas and the local indigenous community on the part of MAC.

As noted, if those responsible for painting the mural had in fact informed MAC (and Harold Thomas, and the local indigenous community) of their intentions -- and then obtained their agreement -- it may still be up.