Change: What Change, How Much and How Quickly?

Dear Students, Parents and Carers

Perhaps ironically, one of the constants of modern society is change. It would appear the pace of change is accelerating. This is a very modern phenomenon. What marked many epochs not so long ago was the absence of real change. Societies remained constant and stable, at least in their basic structures, over long periods of time, even centuries. Since the Industrial Revolution in Great Britain in the 18^th Century, science and technology in particular have driven rapid developments. Sometimes schools can seem to be behind the pace in this regard. In some ways, this is good, and even desired, as schools can be a kind of anchor, a source of constancy amidst the flux. 

In Shore’s case, we need great wisdom in finding the right balance between preserving the very best of our strong traditions – those tried and tested ways – with the increasingly necessary traits of being innovative and entrepreneurial, to ensure we act in the best interests of our students, both present and future.

As an Education academic in my other existence, I know that the literature on change management is extensive.  Change for change’s sake has no legitimacy and temporary fads are to be avoided. Where change is embarked upon, there needs to be a strong rationale and stakeholders need to be convinced on a number of fronts. The first is that the change represents an improvement. The second is that it is possible in terms of other exigencies, such as people’s time and capacity to cope. The third is that change has a champion, or champions, who will drive it forward and see it through. The fourth is that the change is sustainable over the long term. This latter element requires the change itself being nourished. Sometimes its proponents need to accept the infamous J-curve where the change itself will make things worse for a while in order to make things better later. Such is the sometimes disruptive impact and initial cognitive dissonance of change.

As a keen student of schools, and oft-time commissioned reviewer of schools, what I have seen is that most attempted change in schools fails. This can be because it is conducted as a revolution. Schools are complex organisations that respond better to evolution than revolution. Sometimes change is driven too quickly to take root, sometimes the case for change has not been adequately made, sometimes its supporters move on to something else before the change is sufficiently embedded to survive. Change is like a young sapling. The soil needs to be properly prepared, and the plant watered if it is to survive.

Often one hears the mantra “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.” I am not a supporter of this message. It is a way of saying that the status quo is the best we can do, that good is good enough, and that continual improvement is not relevant. If we were to adopt this mantra, we would all still be driving Model T-Fords! 

Schools need to be nimble, agile and wise about change. To return to the beginning of these comments, the most widespread changes before us right now seem to be about technology and how to harness it for our boys in a way that expands their ambit, and is a helpful servant and not a master. 

We need to be aware, however, that any change we undertake is essentially about modes rather than basics. Key focus on essentials, such as literacy and numeracy, must, and will, remain. We are not, after all, amending what may be called the human condition or the nature of our humanity. Well did the writer Ecclesiastes say “What has been will be again, what has been done will be done again; there is nothing new under the sun.” (Ecclesiastes 1:9). Indeed, change is most palatable when it sits on a bedrock of fundamental continuity.

Real change in schools, other than disruptive paradigm change, is usually, and sometimes infuriatingly, slow.  Schools may be compared to great ocean liners. Although the wheel and rudder are turned, the size of the vessel means that a change of direction goes slowly.

As School Council considers strategic directions, it will, in due course, seek input from representative groups about how Shore best embraces a strong future in a rapidly changing world.

Dr J Collier
Interim Headmaster

Scozzi Fundraising – Thank You!

Thank you from the Shore Common Room

On behalf of the entire Shore Common Room, thank you for the magnificent support we have received towards the Nigel Scozzi fundraiser. We have surpassed our target of $400,000 and through a variety of initiatives, have raised more than $520,000. This is a true testament to the readiness of our Shore Community to give. A formal thank you will be sent by the Headmaster this Term, as we acknowledge the extraordinary generosity of our Shore Community and love for Nigel.

In the interim, Nigel continues to work on his rehabilitation. He remains in Royal Ryde where his daily physiotherapy and occupational therapy sessions have helped him achieve small advances in the strength of his arms. We are willing him to grow stronger every day, so we can once again have him as an integral part of our Common Room.

Ms B Doran
President, Shore Common Room

Thank you from Nigel

My gratitude is very difficult to convey in words for what the Shore Community has done to support myself and my family over the past seven months.

Two words in particular sum up my feelings: First is the great LOVE I have felt from parents, boys and staff (past and present). Secondly, an even stronger emotion is how HUMBLED I feel from the outpouring of concern and generosity for my health.

For all the boys who baked, swam, run marathons, washed cars, pressure washed, gernied and helped out around the home to raise funds, THANK YOU. I have read every one of your messages of encouragement and inspiration, and they are what keeps me going.

THANK YOU to everyone for your support and open arms to help my family, your generosity, your kindness, and your love.

Please keep me in your prayers.

With gratitude and warmth,

Mr N Scozzi

School-wide Social Media Accounts

We’ve recently launched School-wide official social media accounts!

If you would like to stay up to date with School-wide Shore activities, news and events, please follow our new Instagram and Facebook pages.

We encourage past, present and future students, families, friends and staff to connect with Shore.

Instagram: @shore.official

Facebook: facebook.com/shore.official

Please check out our website to view all our social media channels, and to read our Community Social Media Guidelines: shore.nsw.edu.au/shore-socials

Boarding Trial for 2023

Current Shore families who are interested in learning more about full-time or weekly School Boarding are invited to a Boarding Trial in Week 7 of Term 4: Monday 21 November until Friday 25 November inclusive. Boys will have the opportunity to stay on site for the School week and experience life as a Shore Boarder.

Requests for further information and/or applications to participate should be directed (only) to Mr David Anderson, Director of Boarding: danderson@shore.nsw.edu.au

SPA Guest speaker: Liane Moriarty

Shore Parents’ Association (SPA) was delighted to host New York Times best-selling author Liane Moriarty at the School’s Northbridge campus last week. 85 ardent fans enjoyed lunch while listening to the Sydney author share tales of key moments and memories in her life, from writing stories for her father as a young girl, to meeting Nicole Kidman during the Hollywood adaptation of her books Big Little Lies and Nine Perfect Strangers.

All profits from the event are being donated to the Indigenous Literacy Foundation: https://www.indigenousliteracyfoundation.org.au/ild The SPA look forward to holding similar events in 2023!

Digital Learning Device Programme Parent Information Session Recording

Thank you to everyone who was able to attend the DLDP Parent Information session webinar for Senior School parents on 27 October. For those who were unable to make it, or would simply like to revisit the information, please find here a recording of the presentation and the Q&A panel session.

Those parents and carers who have additional questions, are also very welcome to submit them to: digitallearningdevices@shore.nsw.edu.au

Sony Camp Cocktail Evening

All Shore parents are warmly invited to join us at the Sony Camp Cocktails.

To purchase tickets please click here: trybooking.com/CDRNL

For more information about Sony Camp please visit Lampada: lampada.shore.nsw.edu.au/homepage/27974

Chaplains Chat

We hear a lot in our western world about achieving our potential. Much of this can come from well-meaning sources and people encouraging us to strive to do better in our lives. People will often see talent and abilities in others and want them to use these skills. We should use the gifts we have and develop the skills that we possess (even work on those that we feel we need to). However, reaching our ‘potential’ is such a tricky concept to grasp. In fact, ultimately it is something that we can never really achieve. I am sure we all have more potential in us, no matter how hard we try or work at something.

Perhaps a different question to reflect upon is, “where are our talents and abilities being used in our lives?” Are they just being used ultimately for self, or do we see them being used around other people, in communities and even for the betterment of others around us? We all have skills and abilities in life across a range of different activities and interests. These have come from God. Yes, we can work to develop these, but let us also see how we can use these for the good of others. As 1 Peter 4: reminds us: “Each of you should use whatever gift you have received to serve other, as faithful stewards of God’s grace in its various forms.”

Rev. A Benn
Chaplain

Sunday 6 November – Boarders Chapel Service

CRU Update – the nature of God

This week at CRU, we continued our ‘tough questions’ discussions, with Ms Domingo presenting to us on the nature of God. She reminded us that the Trinity is the Biblical concept which shows us the nature of God. While the Bible constantly reminds us that there is one God, we also read that God is the three-in-one God. The relationship between God the Father, God the Son (Jesus) and God the Holy Spirit, are all distinct but there is still one God. They have different roles yet serve the common purpose of God’s will. Ms Domingo also pointed to God’s relational nature and how we can know Him. This is such amazing news that God has revealed Himself to us and given us His son Jesus so we can be saved if we believe in Him!

Mr Craig also addressed the question of the reliability of the Bible. If we are people that want to read our Bibles, how is it that we can trust the Bible itself? Mr Craig pointed to the prophecies of the Old Testament that came true through Jesus hundreds of years later. He referred to the book of Isaiah which predicted the death of Jesus, 700 years before Jesus lived on Earth. In addition, there are numerous examples of non-Christian sources which point to the evidence within the Bible. Historians such as Josephus and Tacitus tell us of Jesus and his existence, as well as his death on the Cross. We can be encouraged that what is in the Bible is reliable and trustworthy.

Mr D Becker
9 TY4

Exploring the Dramatic Elements

This term, our Year 10 Elective Drama students have been studying the skills and techniques of Physical Theatre. The movement of the human body is at the heart of contemporary theatrical performance, and our students have been developing a strong understanding of the way the body moves in space and the meaning that is communicated physically between performer and audience on both a literal and symbolic level.

Students worked with the dramatic elements of space, movement, tempo, focus, rhythm, and tension and applied specific physical theatre techniques as building blocks to devise an original six to eight minute in-class performance. They communicated ideas around a chosen theme, beginning with the stimulus (Restlessness, Revolution, Restore) as a springboard to their process.

The result was a compelling series of theatrical experiences for all present. We take great pleasure in sharing a glimpse of the Drama classroom with our wider community!

Ms A Crompton
Head of Drama

Basketball Report

Basketball returned this week with home fixtures against Sydney Grammar School for everyone but the lower opens, who travelled to Darlinghurst, Knox and Waverley for away fixtures.

The First V were looking for a bounce-back win after a tough opening loss against The King’s College.  The team utilised their defensive training well and won the rebounding battle 62 to 32 and restricted their opponents to just two second chance points, thanks in part to a team high 11 rebounds for Sam Guild. Combined with the consistent scoring of Tom Graetz and Julian Reynolds, who combined for 45 points, it ended up being a solid 76 to 63 win for the men in white.

The Second V were looking to turn their opening day win into a streak and dominated from the word ‘go’ to grab a 57 to 27 win. Tough defence was combined with up-tempo, team oriented basketball which saw Shore finish with 14 assists and four players shared scoring honours, with Ben Barry, James Boyd, Nick Riley, and player of the game, Nick Wendt, finishing with 9 points each.

Outside the competition teams, we had a great week, with a perfect 8-0 in the 16s and an almost as impressive 12-2 in the Opens. Notable results include massive wins from the 14As (52-21) and the 16Hs (42-4) as well as nail-biter wins for the 14Bs (23-22) and 15Es (25-23). Finally, spare a thought for the 15As, who went down by just 2 points in extra time, and the Thirds, who left themselves a massive hole to climb with a 20-point deficit at the half and clawed it back to just 5 by the end of the game.

Player of the Week

Harry Siebold after his outrageous 20 point haul for the 16Hs.

Team of the Week

The 14Bs, after sealing a one point win right at the death.

Results Summary

Mr G Davis
MIC, Basketball

Rowing Report from Sydney Grammar School Regatta

Last weekend, a squad of Shore rowers competed at the annual Sydney Grammar Regatta. This event was held at the Sydney Olympic Regatta venue and was the first regatta of the 2022-2023 racing season.

In action at this event was our Year 10 squad along with our Senior GPS squad. Our Year 10 VIII’s got the racing underway and unfortunately due to illness and injury our 4th Year 10 crew could not take to the water. Our 3rd Year 10 VIII enjoyed a victory and placed 2nd in their two starts, whilst our 2nd Year 10 crew commenced their season well, with two strong performances resulting in two wins. The 1st Year 10 VIII learnt a tough lesson in what looked like a very close field this year and the tough conditions penalised their rough execution of the rowing stroke.

In the Senior racing, our GPS crews had a very solid performance in their opening rounds of racing. The 4th team enjoyed two back-to-back victories, racing well in both and gaining valuable experience. Our GPS Third IV experienced a great victory in the first race and then had to learn a very valuable lesson about being ready at the start line, finishing in 2nd place after a frantic first 250 metres.

The GPS Second IV had a strong first race, finishing in the silver medal position but struggled with the conditions in the second race and fell back through the pack. The GPS First IV, after finishing in 3rd place in the first race, showed great resolve to move one place better in the final race of the day, into 2nd place. Our GPS First and Second VIII rounded off the day with some promising performances. The Second VIII finished the day placing 2nd and 3rd, whilst the First VIII reversed that and finished with 3rd and 2nd place. In both divisions, the strong headwind made execution very important.

Mr G Bates
MIC, Rowing

SLS Report

Year 7 and 8

The nippers conducted beach activities on Wednesday at Long Reef due to the sea being due to powerful surf. 
On Saturday, conditions were a lot calmer and the boys were able to get stuck into some board training followed by an IRONMAN event.

The following results were recorded during the week:

Year 9 and 10 Bronze Award Group

The boys completed another intense week of training and learning, preparing for their Bronze Award. Tuesday’s pool session saw a lengthy swim plus some 50m tube rescues and drags. Beach sessions included board rescues, tube rescues, a run-swim-run and some competitive relays. Back up at the Surf Life Saving Club, the boys worked in small groups with a Year 11 instructor to learn the fundamentals of CPR.

Year 10 and 11 Patrol Group

The boys had a busy week of training and working on their Bronze proficiencies and learning new skills. They brushed up on their board and tube rescues to add the final pieces to their Bronze proficiency. They also completed a range of competitive water and beach events, including a fiercely contested flags event which saw Duncan Cowan just beating Jake Gattorna to the flag in the final.

Spencer Nelson, Will Robinson and Will Pritchard missed the IRONMAN contest for good reason. They competently ran CPR stations for the Bronze Award group, teaching the boys vital skills to help them in their assessment in late November.

The following IRONMAN results were recorded:

Whilst on Patrol, Lachlan Walter, Jasper Krawchuk, Spencer Nelson and Ollie Hurt also took part in some land-based IRB Crew training led by Old Boy and IRB driver, Sam Atkinson. The boys are looking forward to completing the IRB Crew certification this Term or in Term 1 next year. Finally, special mention must be made of Sam Walter who performed his first rescue whilst on Patrol. A lady was having difficulty exiting the surf in a challenging shore break. Sam leapt into action and helped the lady to her feet and supported her back to the beach and safety. Great work Sam!

Mr G Jones
Acting MIC, SLS

Creative Spotlight

Cartoon of the Week

H. D. Corcoran

Value and Evaluation

Inequality as an Undeniable Consequence of Existence

J. Y. Gao

In light of the contextual progresses and sensitivities surrounding gender identity, identity politics, and pronouns, I wish to commence what I foresee as an extensive series within which I will explore these concepts with regard to their causes and consequences, as well as include an editorial suggestion. Of course, that isn’t to say that my opinions become invisible in the presentation of my content and the tone with which I do so save for a suggestive comment at the end; on the contrary, I will put forward my personal voice within the piece so that you may see that these topics are of great importance to me, and that it is precisely because of its relevance and exposure in today’s cultural landscape that I delve into these issues. I don’t write to offend, and so I will refrain from offensive tonality, yet I cannot guarantee an all inclusive article which cradles every individual’s hopes and dreams as if it were a new-born ready to live. 

I thought I might commence this series with a definition of value. What is value? Why is value important? Where do we see ‘value’ manifest itself in our lives? These are some of the questions that we might tackle today. 

A mouse sees a piece of cheese. For one reason or another, it decides to place a morsel in its mouth and swallow. During the time just before the morsel enters its mouth, there is a small dopamine release. It is satisfied after it swallows the piece of cheese for about 15 minutes. Consciously (to whatever extent that conscious may be compared to the human conscious, we don’t know, but it is there), the mouse assigns a positive value for a piece of cheese – or, more appropriately, the sensory information representative of cheese – and also for the feeling of satisfaction, as indeed, it is by nature a positive feeling. And henceforth starts the life of a mouse whose meek conscious ability saves the mouse from all existential questions about the meaning of life and adopts, wholly, the finding of cheese as its primary concern and, in anthropomorphised terms, a purpose to live for. 

It is safe to say that the most commonly held opinion about the physical world is that it exists. And though there are fields of discursivity that challenge this assumption, it is one that we will stay with for the time being. Without conscious beings, like our mouse friend, or potentially even unconscious beings, the physical world has no inherent value. Its value comes from the quality that we describe it with (where ‘we’ stands for all conscious beings). This process assigns things with either positive or negative values at varying magnitudes. It is an all-encompassing, universal, existential, metaphysical number line. This assigning of values is a biological need as you can see from the mouse anecdote, and is, at its foundation, the definition of consciousness. It is our ability (‘our’ once again used inclusively to group all conscious beings) to choose based on what we want. 

It starts with biological needs, but it quickly becomes something much more interesting. I borrow a slightly outdated psychological theory proposed in 1943 by Maslow, who describes our psychology in a pyramidal hierarchy ranking our needs from most instinctive to least instinctive. At the bottom is food, drink and shelter. The second level comprises safety needs. Though there have been numerous revisions of these needs and this pyramidal structure, I think we can extract a basic truth that is undeniable. When given the choice between shelter and no shelter, we choose shelter – save for some extraordinary circumstances. When given the choice between life and shelter, we would happily sleep in the rain, on the dirt, and live, rather than have shelter and die. Therefore, there is a hierarchy. Now, for some who perhaps are so heavily burdened by the weight of love, like Romeo and Juliet, that life seems pointless without the company of the other, then belonging and love might rank below physiological needs (see diagram below). But the point isn’t about the existence of THE pyramid of needs, but that everyone has A pyramid of needs custom to their circumstance and their individual psychology. Commonalities between pyramids form societies, which in reverse perpetuate these commonalities through its various functions. A society, consisting of individuals, will have a shared hierarchy that every individual subscribes to to a large degree. If your values lie primarily outside of this societal pyramid, or that one of your values betrays one of the more fundamental values of society – like a murderer does the preservation of life – then you are punished ‘justly’ by the law and by God and deemed an outcast of society sentenced to live a life of imprisonment. This is the intrinsic nature of society. 

In regards to the society that we live in today, I think I can safely say that a vast majority (a majority so vast the minority can be deemed negligible for the sake of this argument but nevertheless important to mention) would rather be a rich, influential person than a homeless person. And as monetary and/or reputational success is a positive value held by the society,

I think it is fair to say that certain individuals like Martin Luther King Jr are of greater value to society than others, like a particular homeless man on the street. The police force and the public alike would very much agree on protecting Martin Luther King Jr in the case of an earthquake than the homeless man sleeping on the street corner. As sad as it may seem, or as intuitive as it may seem, it is a rather irrefutable truth. Both you and I don’t have police escort, body guards, presidential attention and thousands of people crowding the streets just to catch a glimpse of you. And therefore it is irrefutably true that society has, is, and will always treat individuals unequally. 

It is impossible for the individual to not evaluate something when he/she observes; it’s an interesting thought experiment. Attempt to observe something as it is (refer to Heidegger’s ‘Being and Time’). It is impossible. You will most likely have a noun to describe it, and, along with that, an extensive web of preconceptions about that object; you are inescapable from adjectives, and adjectives by their very nature EVALUATE. Hence it is the nature of this existence to evaluate – to assign value to – and society as a living and breathing mechanism is no exception. An individual can be more valuable or less valuable to society. Because society would rather save one individual over another by virtue of who they are – like an honest, kind person over a serial killer, no one is equal in the eyes of society. 

Now of course you can assign yourself a value, and it is important that you value yourself highly. It isn’t healthy to devalue yourself, and it isn’t something that I am encouraging. What I am putting forward is that society will mercilessly evaluate you, and though it is important that you keep constant your value for yourself, regardless of what value society assigns you, it will largely define the success that you have in life. 

In response to this, one might propose to change society, and thus I need to emphasise: it is impossible for an individual to not evaluate; evaluation is something that is inherently biological, psychological, conscious, subconscious, instinctive, primitive, academic, and inextricable from the EXISTENCE of consciousness. As long as the individual evaluates, the society evaluates. As long as the society evaluates, it will evaluate the individual. As long as society evaluates the individual, individuals – in respect to each other and society – will not be equal.

The Bird is Freed

The Social Impact of Elon Musk’s Purchase of Twitter

W. H. R. Johnston

On October 27th, Elon Musk completed his controversial purchase of the social media giant, Twitter, with the acquisition totaling approximately US$44 billion, which, even for the world’s richest man, is no small sum. Musk has made clear his distaste for the current ‘cancel culture’ and seemingly envisions his new platform as a countercyclical measure against the increasingly politically progressive social media platforms. 

While in the United States, their Constitution’s First Amendment restricts the government from censoring speech, however, private companies such as Twitter, Facebook, and many more, are not bound to the same rules. Although the encroachment of free speech has been a necessary tool in combating the spread of hate speech, misinformation and harassment on these platforms, Elon Musk is one among many critics who feel as though it has been exacerbated beyond the point of necessity and serves as a function to assimilate views rather than protect users.

Therefore, many of the claims that Musk has made surrounding his takeover of Twitter have been focused on promoting free speech, with one of his first ‘tweets’ on the platform since his purchase being, “Comedy is now legal on Twitter”. This statement, however, was somehow far less controversial than other claims made by the billionaire entrepreneur, including his promise to reduce utilisation of permanent bans, and most notably un-ban former president Donald Trump following his removal from Twitter after the riot at the Capitol in January 2021 and the possibility that his ‘tweets’ might incite further violence. 

Elon Musk’s impact on Twitter since the acquisition has been immediate, firing several key executives including the CEO and CFO, making his intent of a policy overhaul clear from the very start. However, Musk has stated that a content moderation council with “widely diverse viewpoints” will be formed to decide the extent of regulation and censorship of content in this new era of Twitter, stating that “no major content decisions or account reinstatements will happen before that council convenes,” indicating Musk’s understanding that his reforms should at least be subject to some debate before their implementation.

Musk has stated his concern for the increasingly radicalised political views that are spread across social media, and claims that the only way to prevent the echo chamber effect of affirming dangerous views is to provide a platform in which people can express their ideas and have to interact with others who may disagree, rather than being able to censor and cancel them. 

While in theory, that seems like a nice solution to the increasing political division, it is not that simple. Reducing censorship and moderation on these platforms would obviously increase the spread of hate speech and misinformation, with that prime example of the fatal Capitol riots evidencing its toll on the fabric of society. So while Musk may disagree with the perceived balance achieved by social media in terms of their encroachment of free speech, his response could just as well take it too far the other way causing equal, or possibly further, damage.

With Musk’s push against the current of mainstream social media politics, many possible advertisers are beginning to look tentatively at the prospect of future affiliation with Twitter, and while money may be no object for the world’s richest man, it is doubtful that he would sacrifice such a large revenue stream for his new company, and might therefore have to adjust the implementation of his views to sustain the company’s main source of income. 

Therefore the progression of censorship and cancel culture on social media lies in the hands of Elon Musk. On one hand, he could draw back on his promises and continue Twitter on its current path, mostly in line with other mainstream social media, or attempt to develop a platform which eliminates excessive restrictions inspiring a push for the return of greater freedom of speech in social media and a reigning in of political divide, but risk it devolving into a platform of harassment and hate if enough people exploit the opportunity. With such drastic changes to the executive team, it would seem as though Musk is willing to take the risk, but reading the minds of eccentric billionaires is often fairly difficult, so for now, only time will tell.

Integrative Peace

Economic Integration and its Contribution to World Peace

J. A. McCreery

Your car, your phone, your medicine, your machines – all integral to daily life, let alone one’s health or business profits. What would we do without them? You would hope we can produce and control them ourselves. It will remain a hope, though, as these products all rank in Australia’s top 10 imports, our dependency on the profit seeking and grace of other nations immense. 

Australia is not alone in its dependency, as globalization continues on its fiery path economies have become evermore interlinked, world trade increasing momentously since World War II – from 17.8% of worldwide GDP in 1960 to 47.4% in 2005 – levels of imports all around the world jumping sky high. The reliance occurs when the process of international division of labour takes hold. Essentially, if one nation is better at producing something it does so and doesn’t bother producing as much of anything else, it simply trades with other specialised countries to get said item. Australia provides the mines, China and Japan provide the cars. If this were to be taken to the extreme, the result is a host of nations which only create a few things and, as such, are incredibly good at doing so, efficiency increases, prices lower and quality rises. 

Yet each nation becomes highly invested in the other and their economic prosperity, they need each other for the staples of life. So, is this a precursor for peace or a tragic loss of sovereignty?

The most aggressive, expansionist states of both WWI and WW2 were heavily motivated by the need to become an autarchy (economically self reliant), both Facist Italy and Germany sought independence as a means of asserting their independence. These nations’ commitment to achieving such a testament of the deep seated desire for self-sufficiency which embodies the human fear of reliance on others, especially the foreign, for life and growth. 

Would such a rebellion be possible if the Axis powers production base were to only cover a few industries, dependent on other economies for the rest?  The logic follows that if states are dependent on each other for goods and services they would be unable to wage a war without experiencing significant repercussions, those repercussions increased by the following sanctions likely to be incurred from other trading partners. Such a theory is labeled as the liberal peace view and in political science emphasizes that mutual economic interdependence can be a conduit of peace.

Yet the homogenous, fully integrated extreme being considered is far from the reality. Economies are all at different stages of integration, yet more prominently, intra-regional integration and isolation is prevalent. Organisations such as the EU and the CFA Franc bring geographically close countries together, providing mass trade privileges and exclusions to those outside. Such a system could result in a series of independent blocks, amalgamations of economic might. How would conflict between these powers look?

This grouping of nations again echoes back to WWII and the commonly cited reason for both its instigation and its scale, the Alliance system. When a dispute between countries in different alliance blocks occurs, all other nations become involved, leading to a more global, intense war than would otherwise have occured. 

It is unclear which of these two scenarios will happen, or if they will occur in turn. An empirical assessment on the impact of trade integration on military conflict (CATO – NO. 211) showed that an increase in bilateral trade interdependence and global trade integration significantly promotes peace between countries. Yet, studies have also investigated whether interstate reliance increases or reduces the likelihood of military conflict and the results are highly ambiguous, just like the theoretical literature. Perhaps war, perhaps peace – regardless the ever changing dynamic role of economics and global integration is unmistakable.

Unfiltered

The Upsetting Reality of Digital Advancement

L. D. Banks

AS TECHNOLOGY TRICKLES ITS WAY INTO ALL PARTS OF OUR LIVES, the accepted state of the internet has rightly begun being called into question. The internet contains an unimaginable amount of content, of which a large amount is harmful. There is no denying that there are strange and cruel people out in the world, and as it stands, it is simple to distribute content online with the potential to embarrass, bully, or scar. This reality is made worse as it is logistically impossible to stop the expansion of any material once it has been posted. These problems have sparked a mental health epidemic unlike anything faced by generations before us. 

The internet is fast flowing, making many feel as though their perspective is overlooked, encouraging them to share their view more ‘passionately’. People feel more comfortable sharing their most personal issues, ideas and views online, which they may not broadcast in real life. Not to mention people’s use of pseudonyms, allowing one to say whatever they like, no matter how hurtful, and experience no consequence at all. Thus, the culture of the internet, particularly amongst youth has become one of divide, aggression and juvenile spitefulness. 

These changing behaviours seem to be carrying across into real life, as the line between online and offline becomes blurred. Community spirit seems to be taking steps backward as people spend more time socialising online than they do in the real world. People no longer make eye contact as you pass down the street, opting rather to swiftly and awkwardly pull out their device, check the weather, and put it back in their pocket once a safe distance past the surrounding pedestrians. Now I must admit, I most definitely fall victim to such a behaviour, yet it is still concerning that we live in a world where the unspoken norm is to completely ignore fellow human beings. 

The status quo of community spirit is poor. It can be upsetting to think that there are people out there who go every day unacknowledged, living their life out through a screen. Most significantly, it is saddening to see the reality that ‘aussie community spirit’, on the streets of big cities, does not exist. This lack of camaraderie, if not caused, is at least perpetuated by the toxic environment online. People spend hours arguing, judging, and comparing, all to shut off their device at 2am, after putting off sleeping to corrode their brain, feeling unfulfilled, unaccepted and exhausted.

I am of the opinion that the internet should be treated with much more caution. Although Shore thankfully provides a web-blocker platform and other software, the boys of the school are left entirely to their own devices whilst not using Shore devices.

Growing up in this era of tech, I can conclusively say that the unlimited usage of the internet was not beneficial to my development or that of the boys in my year, or the cohorts that surround me. It is extremely naive to deny that young boys in particular are exceptionally curious, and thus come across all kinds of weird things that should not be seen by anyone, let alone a developing brain. Thus, I believe that, just like when a person turns 18 and becomes an adult, and gains access to new territory to engage with, when they are mature enough to handle it, the internet should be no different. The introduction of identity verification would enable many problems faced on the internet to be tackled head on. Prevent the usage of fake accounts under fake or other names. It would make cyber crime, such as bullying, harassment and sharing of illegal content much easier to track, and stop. But most importantly, it would encourage people to think twice before posting, as every post, comment, like, share, etc., becomes linked to their real life identity.

The Catch-22 of Collective Action

The Common Denominator of PBL’s and Climate Change Policy

M. D. Kwak

The group project is perhaps one of the most dreaded and stressful times of an adolescent’s schooling. It can be the fall of even the most experienced diplomats and prudent academicians. But why? What about the group project environment makes it so difficult to navigate? I would suggest it shares its root problem with issues like climate change inaction, decreased political buy-in and persisting poverty – the collective action problem.

The collective action problem arises out of a scenario where a group of individuals have shared common interests and would mutually benefit from cooperation. The issue that arises is when individuals act on their own conflicting self-interests which discourage joint action. Most commonly it is a result of individuals rationally wanting to benefit from a preferred outcome without necessarily paying for it themselves. It’s also the unfortunate case that, regardless of whether others decide to opt out or not, it is always “better” not to cooperate. If everyone else participates in cooperation, opting out would give you a competitive advantage in terms of extra resources and time to spend. If most choose to opt out of cooperation for similar reasons, continuing to remain would constitute a disproportionate amount of labour for limited rewards. Implicit in this thinking is an assumption that the remaining collective would be able to function without them and still create benefits. It’s seen when a citizen convinces themselves that their vote won’t matter as it’s only one out of millions of others; or Australia’s excuse of “only contributing a tiny fraction to climate change anyways.”

The concept of freeriding becomes crucial here. In this scenario, defectors are called freeriders because they benefit from the cooperation of others yet are unwilling to reciprocate with proportionate or any cooperation at all. Such creatures are common in society and most annoying in group projects. However, far from something to be dismissed, freeloaders constitute the fundamental deadlock which makes the collective action problem so difficult to resolve. Freeloaders initiate an inevitable spiral whereas for every freeloader, the people who remain to work are increasingly burdened with work and see diminishing returns for their efforts. This in turn creates more and more freeloaders who hope to benefit from an outcome they don’t have to contribute to – until there is a tipping point at which the people who remain working cannot sustain themselves and the freeloaders – and the whole thing just falls apart.

Climate change inaction is a perfect example. It is a problem that inherently requires collective action due to its extraordinary scale and time-sensitive nature. Existentially, environmentally and economically, it is probably in every nation’s long-term interest to cooperate when it comes to stopping climate change. However, each of these nations possess and act upon their short-term interests, which is especially potent considering short-term election cycles. The result? Either no or very limited willingness to act.

Collective action problems have often been compared to the prisoner’s dilemma – it certainly shares its puzzling and paradoxical nature. At its core, however, it is an unfortunate result of people trying to act out of their own self-interest – trying to be that rational free-rider – only for them to face a bizarrely irrational harm in the long-term. 

A Tasty Competitor

Can Wendy’s Become a Staple in Australia’s Fast-Food Industry?

B. N. Dent

I’m sure that we can all agree that in almost every instance of choice within our lives, it is better to have more options. Our never-ending appetite for ‘more’ in life drives our desire to have as many options as possible so that we can ensure that we are making the optimal decision to cater to our needs. This desire for infinite choice is mimicked by the retail industry which in today’s world provides us with an unnecessary amount of options for any given good or service. Across Australia today, you could find hundreds of cookie brands that sell products virtually identical to the famous OREO cookie which in itself is a knock-off of another brand called Hydrox founded in 1908.

Australia’s $22-billion fast-food and takeaway industry is a subset of the retail industry that is heavily affected by the limitless nature of consumer choice. The industry currently employs roughly 200,000 people, contains 36,427 individual businesses and is still expanding. As of mid-September this year, the American-born fast food franchise Wendy’s announced their upcoming arrival in Australia. Wendy’s is currently the world’s third largest hamburger fast-food chain, and it is known for its signature frozen dairy dessert: The Frosty. The company currently operates in 30 countries and territories world-wide and is constantly looking for expansion. Noticing the, only, moderately competitive environment and the steady growth of Australia’s fast-food industry, Wendy’s viewed Australia as a perfect target, but is it likely that they will succeed in their expansion to this foreign land?

If we interpret past trends of similar franchising situations and use them as a metric for future success, then yes, it is likely that Wendy’s will succeed. Today, Australia’s top four largest players in the fast-food industry (Subway, McDonald’s, Domino’s, and KFC) were all founded in America and later franchised out into Australia with astronomical success. A recent example of this was Taco Bell, who despite only being in Australia for a short period of time, recorded a revenue of $28-million. Despite this, there are a range of additional factors that must be assessed when predicting the likelihood of success for a foreign chain branching into Australia. Two essential factors within this range include the consumer’s understanding of the chain’s market position (i.e., a defined product and complementary target market) and the business’s ability to establish brand names (i.e., well-known staples that consumers instantly think of in relation to a business: the Big Mac).

When we consider Wendy’s extreme success of $1.7 billion in annual revenue within the United State’s vastly competitive fast-food industry and the solid establishments of American chains within Australia in the past, it is clearly inferable that they are likely to succeed in our market. In so many facets of our culture, we along with many other nations are heavily influenced by the activity of the US; are we slowly becoming a replica of the US? 99% of the movies and TV shows that we consume are from the US. At this rate, it is likely that we will begin to sound like them and start watching baseball instead of cricket. America’s immensely influential power over the world can be directly attributed to its seemingly impenetrable economy, and unless another nation disrupts/overtakes this powerhouse, their influence on the culture of foreign nations will continue forever.

More than Just Cricket

A game that will be remembered forever

A.M Bailey

There are multiple sporting events held throughout the course of history: F1, Basketball, the Olympics, just to name a few. However, one of the main events of Australian culture is the cricket world cup. Not the type of matches where you sit down on the sofa for the whole day watching Nathan Lyon bowl his 30 over spells against the Poms. But the type of tournament that brings people from all cultures all around the world to watch the fast paced and exciting type of cricket known as T20. 

The 2022 ICC Men’s T20 World Cup is the eighth ICC Men’s T20 World Cup tournament. It is being played in Australia from 16 October to 13 November 2022. Originally, the tournament was to be held in 2020, however, in July 2020, the International Cricket Council (ICC) confirmed that the tournament had been postponed, due to the COVID-19 pandemic. In August 2020, the ICC also confirmed that Australia, the defending T20 champs, would host the rearranged tournament in 2022. 

On Sunday the 23^rd of October the cricketing rivalry between India and Pakistan was, and still is, arguably one of the fiercest in global sport. Cricketing culture in Australia remains in the forefront of everyone’s minds as we enter the summer season. For India and Pakistan this obsession never stops. Cricket represents something greater, a transcending passion to something more akin to religion. With the T20 world cup being held on Australian shores for the first time, over 90,000 people ranging from all over the world descended upon the MCG. According to a tweet “If it wasn’t the largest gathering of South Asians in history outside of South Asia it would have been mighty close.”

Many will argue this was the greatest ever T20 game. On cricketing quality alone, perhaps others sit above this match. But considering the crowd, the atmosphere, the drama and the overall narrative, there’s a very strong argument that this was one of the most iconic cricket matches of the 21st century. It was career-defining for Virat Kohli. Perhaps it also defined a generation of fans as well. 

No matter whether a 6 was hit or the very next ball the batsman got bowled, Indian and Pakistani supporters cheered their heart out for their teams the whole way through the match. Yet after the final ball was struck, both groups shook hands with the other team and then with each other. It was a display of camaraderie symbolic of the occasion. This was more than a cricket match. Because that’s the beauty of sport, no matter what country you are from you feel pride in supporting your team because a win for your team also reflects as a win for yourself. 

In anticipation for what could happen next, Rohit Sharma could not have summed up India’s night any better. “I have no voice left, No matter what situation, you’ve got to believe you can pull through, and that partnership changed the game for us. 

We knew it would not be an easy target on that pitch. We knew we would have to bat out of our skins. Virat and Hardik are experienced guys. Staying calm and taking it as deep as possible was critical, and they did that. 

The way we won is more pleasing for us, the way we came back. Hats off to Virat. It has to be not one of his best, but the best innings he has played for India.”

The real challenge to remain is guessing who is going to take away Australia’s trophy, or will Australia retain the trophy for another 2 years.

CANCELLED

f’(x): Has Cancel Culture Gone Too Far?

P. P. Zhang

TAYLOR SWIFT’S NEW ALBUM MIDNIGHTS HAS RECEIVED CRITICAL ACCLAIM AND SHATTERED SALES RECORDS LEFT AND RIGHT. However, all good things must come to an end. The same day sales records were being shattered, Midnights was being shattered by a controversy. The artist has been labelled as ‘fatphobic’ as a result of a scene in her “Anti-Hero” music video, which depicts Swift stepping on a scale which subsequently displays “fat”. Now, out of context, perhaps the allegations would seem justified, but in the context of the song is a reference to her struggles with an eating disorder back in 2020. The scene ultimately embodies the self-reflective theme of the song and album as a whole. 

In this era, ‘-phobic’ has become a far-too-common weapon for activists to pin prejudice on an opponent, as a way to shame someone with a simple one-liner. Cancel culture has evolved as a growing issue in the technological, interconnected world that we live in today, with social media platforms such as Twitter especially effective at communicating this contempt. Of course, that’s not to say these terms do not still hold their place in society. Marginalisation and oppression still exists, and is more prevalent than ever, justifying the need for people to speak up. Take  the #MeToo movement, in which cancel culture was crucial in providing justice for women who had been failed by their workplaces and the judicial system. However, it’s difficult to deny that the overuse of ‘-phobic’ terms has inevitably resulted in a collective ‘cancelphobia’, where influencers and society alike are afraid to voice their opinions in the fear of being cancelled or censored. A major problem with cancel culture is its irreversibility – forgiveness is not an option. Once someone is cancelled, they ultimately stay cancelled. 

The everyday use of terms such as ‘homophobic’, ‘transphobic’ and the works has led to another issue: these words no longer hold the same value they used to, and instead, are heavily trivialised and thrown around whenever any instance of partiality arises.

Whenever the cancel culture debate gets heated, the ‘free speech’ argument always gets brought up. Whilst it has a place in our proudly democratic society, free speech does not mean free from consequences. Former President Trump was infamously cancelled and subsequently banned on Twitter, and whilst most can agree this was the right decision, it raises the question of how one decides who is silenced and who is not. 

A few days ago, during one of my procrastination sessions, I was browsing Youtube and ended up watching a blind date video which seemed innocent enough. However, some of the interactions were questionable, and as a result the comments started flaming one participant for racial fetishization, and the other, fatphobia. Again, in this instance, the problem lay in the lack of context; viewers were so quick to cancel something heavily edited for entertainment purposes, perhaps without even watching the rest of the video. As the discussion developed, the audience quickly became divided, not over whether or not the participants were guilty of the above, but which was the lesser evil. We have been left with no other option but to fight fire with fire, in a desperate attempt to cancel the other before they cancel us. Lana Del Rey was similarly accused of racism in her attempt to criticise the double standards in the music industry, forcing the singer to apologise. 

While it’s true, Taylor Swift could’ve used a different word of choice, it’s hard to say whether it would have captured her fight against body dysmorphia to the same degree. Although eventually, she did end up quietly editing the video to answer the public’s cries, music videos have always existed as a form of potentially controversial expression, but one that should surely remain uninhibited by increasingly pervasive things like cancel culture. Activism’s role in the 21st century is undeniable, but now is the time to wonder whether the line between social justice and cancel culture has been crossed one too many times.