The government, quite rightly, has allowed some from Nauru to come to Australia for medical treatment and for childbirth. This was the only just and humane thing to do, and it was done.
As chair of the Diversity Council Australia he has spoken out against gender inequality in the armed forces, he has been vocal about domestic violence and of course has strong views about social cohesion and Australia's cultural diversity.
A day founded on the idea of national unity is increasingly being used by race baiters as a platform to preach collective guilt and perseverate in reciting historical grievance.
Forget pride, achievement, nationalism and the inevitable mindless jingoism normally associated with Australia Day, Stan Grant has put paid to that.
Among settler nations with indigenous populations, apart from a facile 'apology' in 2008, only Australia has refused to come to terms with the shame of its colonial past.
The fact Stan Grant’s compelling speech has gone viral shows just how deeply this refusal to accept the reality of Australia’s history resonates with so many people.
My gripe is that Australia Day has become nondescript and, in attempting to make it appealing to everyone, it fulfils neither its original nor its amended purpose.
We are about to have another Australia Day. And as usual, it raises questions. What does it mean to be Australian? Who's included, and who's not? And how has it changed?
The point of this piece has little to do with Mr Bowie
per se (whom I think might have agreed with at least some of it) and everything to do with our response to his passing.
A Civil Rights Act gave citizenship to black people in 1866. But success for the North and the subjugation of the South began a long period of difficult times for people of colour.
What do 'identity', 'sharing economy' and 'face with tears of joy emoji' have in common?
Even if we are not aware of it, the events of the twentieth century undermine our resolve, eat away at our certainty and colour our time.