Thanks Gamma Gamaliel but I beg to disagree. It seemed to me that your impression of Ozpolitix has been skewed by your all-too-brief sojourn in this scattered sunburnt land. Adelaide is hardly representative of yer Ozzie metropolis and your esteemed rellies and their mates of a similar vintage are becoming rarer and more on the margins. The vast majority of British arrivals in Oz ( including former colleagues and patients who are not all White British) came here as escapees from Thatcherism, the Tories and Brexit.
The so-called “lurch to the right” in Oz is exaggerated. The dog-whistlers such as the unspeakable Pauline Hansen have obtained about 5% of the popular vote and like so many one-note wonders make no effective contribution to social or economic policy development.
The erstwhile Coalition has imploded under the weight of division and squabbling. The last Coalition PM was the most incompetent since Billy McMahon ( government thrown out after 23 years in December 1972. The nadir of his reign was the Robodebt scandal ( an illegitimate and wicked attempt to claw back legitimate social security benefits from a vulnerable group of people). The Coalition government was thrown out in May 2022 and although it gained some ground in the last Federal election the resulting infighting and fracture of the Coalition means that they will collectively remain in opposition for a long time.
Albanese has been largely effective but is weak. He has caved in to pressure from various vocal lobby groups and his latest gaffe was to invite the President of the State of Israel for a visit 2 months after the murder of 14 Jews and 1 Gentile at Bondi Beach.
The vast majority of Australians do not support Israel’s ongoing compaign of destruction in Gaza and are justifiably offended by this visit.
Are we really heading for war? I suspect not in the near future.
As for the proposed sell-off of Defence establishments: I say go for it. I worked for 14 years as a civilian contractor initially at Victoria Barracks in Sydney and came to the conclusion that it is an expensive white elephant which serves little purpose. The East coast submarine base was flogged off 30+ years ago without any comment and HMAS Penguin on the other side of the harbour is a hive of inactivity since the naval hospital closed down.
I don’t hear any talk of the major bases in the West or in Darwin coming under threat of closure.
Defence is infamous for wasting public money hand over fist. I finally quit (among other reasons) over the ineffective stupidity and cowardice of some of my uniformed masters and their civilian accomplices. I will say no more about that.
I’d like to see Penny Wong as PM. Unfortunately not a hope since she is female, lesbian and of Asian descent.
So that’s my 2 bob’s worth. Make of it what you will.
I did throw down the gauntlet and I really appreciate your response You strike me as an interesting person!
You say the swing to the right is exaggerated, put current polling is showing One Nation at something like 27%, not 5%.
Why do you think that is?
Personally I don't think Pauline Hansen has the X factor to be PM but they may get more seats at the next election if things keep going the way they are.
When you say you don't think we'll be going to war anytime soon do you mean you think China is bluffing on a Taiwan invasion or the US is bluffing on defending if it happens?
Good inside info on defence sell-offs. Thank you.
I think Penny Wong could have the x-factor for PM. I don't think the majority of people really care about policies. I think they just want a PM they can think - yeah - they could be our rep.
I think the coalition is in shambles because they don't have the X factor person leading, and their policies weren't hugely different from Labour except for nuclear power. But things are changing as we speak. Could be an interesting next election.
Hot button topics like climate change, immigration, energy supply, tax could change things.
But you know what worries me the most? Our national debt spiralling.
It's happening everywhere. There is an underlying issue going on there.
I'm sure there will be Aussies here who would be more than happy to debate these things with you and I'm sure they will do so in due course.
That they may not have done so far won't be out of fear of 'cancellation' though.
It takes a while to figure out how the Ship operates and it's sometimes best to sit tight and listen before diving in. I say that to myself.
As far as Australian politics goes, my observation is that there isn't much going on over there that is substantially different to what we are seeing over here, essentially a backlash against the liberal left and a lurch to the right in a populist kind of way.
Those on the left are saying the 'Overton Window' has shifted to the right. Those on the right are saying it's shifted to the left.
It all depends on where you stand.
But the right in western liberal democracies has only recently gained traction, as we can see from so many countries in Europe going right.
Historically, that is saying something. What I find interesting is what it is saying. It's more than just an opinion from where you stand because there has been a significant shift.
It's saying that malign actors have a (mostly financial, but in some cases ideological) interest in wrecking western liberal democracy and have realised how cheap and effective media manipulation is in the internet age. Sure, they partly amplify existing trends, but in terms of objective impact and cost very few people would, for example, give a shit about asylum seekers coming to the UK. People only even notice because of the constant wail of a far right media and their allied (probably not directly but who knows) army of influencers and bots. In a lot of ways I suspect they learned lessons from the tactics used by Salafists online to encourage extremism among Muslims, but amplified by the remorseless march of social media algorithms.
Rupert Murdoch has been promoting right wing ideas with little regard for accuracy or balance since the eighties; but I think his efforts took a step up when he started Fox News.
When I was younger the idea that there was no objective truth and everyone was biased was associated with some of the more excitable parts of the left. Fox News was the first major right wing outlet to explicitly run with the idea that facts that the right wing don't like are just as biased as the ideas they do; and therefore what have later been dubbed "alternative facts" are fine.
I'll add in climate change denial think-tanks, and Russian troll farms. I would guess that Russian troll farms do post stuff in support of the authoritarian left such as George Galloway; but the known instances are in support of right-wing causes, such as Brexit and Trump. Russia likes anything that reduces international solidarity among liberal democracies, which the far right does.
I'm not convinced that a move to the right is a 'recent' thing in Australia or anywhere else.
Heck, the UK and US had very right-wing governments under both Thatcher and Reagan.
Australia has had fairly right-wing governments within living memory too.
What I think is new and more recent is the level of populism involved. The left isn't immune to that tendency though either.
Australian Shipmates will forgive me for mentioning this and I don't mean to cause offence, but one of the things that struck me during my visit was the amount of public art and memorials commemorating this, that or the other - something not unique to Australia of course.
I saw several very effusive public monuments and art installations celebrating the achievements and contribution of Vietnamese boat-people for instance.
But it's not that long ago that I remember hawkish Aussie voices calling for those boats to be intercepted, sunk or turned back and their occupants marooned or detained on inhospitable islands.
Yes, paradox abounds.
A rather right-wing Australian PM brought in strict gun-ownership legislation for instance.
It seems that Albanese gets stick whatever he does. My relatives were blaming him for the Bondi Beach massacre because he'd allowed anti-Israel protestors to march across the Sydney Harbour Bridge.
The truly dreadful Adelaide daily paper was full of condemnatory editorials and letters which held him responsible, something some of the grief-stricken relatives of the victims said of course.
It didn't matter how many times I pointed out that the killers were jihadists and not radicalised pro-Palestinian protestors and that a Muslim had tried to tackle and disarm one of the gunmen, it was all Albanese's fault.
Anyone would have thought he'd pulled the triggers himself.
Now he's coming in for some stick for arranging an Israeli visit and for the violence that broke out between police and protestors.
I'm not convinced that a move to the right is a 'recent' thing in Australia or anywhere else.
Heck, the UK and US had very right-wing governments under both Thatcher and Reagan.
Australia has had fairly right-wing governments within living memory too.
What I think is new and more recent is the level of populism involved. The left isn't immune to that tendency though either.
Australian Shipmates will forgive me for mentioning this and I don't mean to cause offence, but one of the things that struck me during my visit was the amount of public art and memorials commemorating this, that or the other - something not unique to Australia of course.
I saw several very effusive public monuments and art installations celebrating the achievements and contribution of Vietnamese boat-people for instance.
But it's not that long ago that I remember hawkish Aussie voices calling for those boats to be intercepted, sunk or turned back and their occupants marooned or detained on inhospitable islands.
Yes, paradox abounds.
A rather right-wing Australian PM brought in strict gun-ownership legislation for instance.
Arguably not strict enough, but ...
I think even he realised that another mass shooting would have sunk the Coalition ship.
I have to smile when I recall the same right wing PM giving the nod for public funding of the human papillomavirus vaccine 20-odd years ago- after his wife required a hysterectomy for cervical cancer.
I'm sure there will be Aussies here who would be more than happy to debate these things with you and I'm sure they will do so in due course.
That they may not have done so far won't be out of fear of 'cancellation' though.
It takes a while to figure out how the Ship operates and it's sometimes best to sit tight and listen before diving in. I say that to myself.
As far as Australian politics goes, my observation is that there isn't much going on over there that is substantially different to what we are seeing over here, essentially a backlash against the liberal left and a lurch to the right in a populist kind of way.
Those on the left are saying the 'Overton Window' has shifted to the right. Those on the right are saying it's shifted to the left.
It all depends on where you stand.
But the right in western liberal democracies has only recently gained traction, as we can see from so many countries in Europe going right.
Historically, that is saying something. What I find interesting is what it is saying. It's more than just an opinion from where you stand because there has been a significant shift.
It's saying that malign actors have a (mostly financial, but in some cases ideological) interest in wrecking western liberal democracy and have realised how cheap and effective media manipulation is in the internet age. Sure, they partly amplify existing trends, but in terms of objective impact and cost very few people would, for example, give a shit about asylum seekers coming to the UK. People only even notice because of the constant wail of a far right media and their allied (probably not directly but who knows) army of influencers and bots. In a lot of ways I suspect they learned lessons from the tactics used by Salafists online to encourage extremism among Muslims, but amplified by the remorseless march of social media algorithms.
I think that's a convenient cop out.
Although you do mention partly amplifying existing trends.
Rupert Murdoch has been promoting right wing ideas with little regard for accuracy or balance since the eighties; but I think his efforts took a step up when he started Fox News.
When I was younger the idea that there was no objective truth and everyone was biased was associated with some of the more excitable parts of the left. Fox News was the first major right wing outlet to explicitly run with the idea that facts that the right wing don't like are just as biased as the ideas they do; and therefore what have later been dubbed "alternative facts" are fine.
I'll add in climate change denial think-tanks, and Russian troll farms. I would guess that Russian troll farms do post stuff in support of the authoritarian left such as George Galloway; but the known instances are in support of right-wing causes, such as Brexit and Trump. Russia likes anything that reduces international solidarity among liberal democracies, which the far right does.
Rupert Murdoch has been around for decades. The polling high of One Nation is a very recent thing in Australia.
China likes anything that reduces solidarity amongst liberal democracies as well.
I don't think the far right reduces solidarity except to shake up the status quo which is no longer working for a lot of people.
I'm sure there will be Aussies here who would be more than happy to debate these things with you and I'm sure they will do so in due course.
That they may not have done so far won't be out of fear of 'cancellation' though.
It takes a while to figure out how the Ship operates and it's sometimes best to sit tight and listen before diving in. I say that to myself.
As far as Australian politics goes, my observation is that there isn't much going on over there that is substantially different to what we are seeing over here, essentially a backlash against the liberal left and a lurch to the right in a populist kind of way.
Those on the left are saying the 'Overton Window' has shifted to the right. Those on the right are saying it's shifted to the left.
It all depends on where you stand.
But the right in western liberal democracies has only recently gained traction, as we can see from so many countries in Europe going right.
Historically, that is saying something. What I find interesting is what it is saying. It's more than just an opinion from where you stand because there has been a significant shift.
It's saying that malign actors have a (mostly financial, but in some cases ideological) interest in wrecking western liberal democracy and have realised how cheap and effective media manipulation is in the internet age. Sure, they partly amplify existing trends, but in terms of objective impact and cost very few people would, for example, give a shit about asylum seekers coming to the UK. People only even notice because of the constant wail of a far right media and their allied (probably not directly but who knows) army of influencers and bots. In a lot of ways I suspect they learned lessons from the tactics used by Salafists online to encourage extremism among Muslims, but amplified by the remorseless march of social media algorithms.
Thanks Gamma Gamaliel but I beg to disagree. It seemed to me that your impression of Ozpolitix has been skewed by your all-too-brief sojourn in this scattered sunburnt land. Adelaide is hardly representative of yer Ozzie metropolis and your esteemed rellies and their mates of a similar vintage are becoming rarer and more on the margins. The vast majority of British arrivals in Oz ( including former colleagues and patients who are not all White British) came here as escapees from Thatcherism, the Tories and Brexit.
The so-called “lurch to the right” in Oz is exaggerated. The dog-whistlers such as the unspeakable Pauline Hansen have obtained about 5% of the popular vote and like so many one-note wonders make no effective contribution to social or economic policy development.
The erstwhile Coalition has imploded under the weight of division and squabbling. The last Coalition PM was the most incompetent since Billy McMahon ( government thrown out after 23 years in December 1972. The nadir of his reign was the Robodebt scandal ( an illegitimate and wicked attempt to claw back legitimate social security benefits from a vulnerable group of people). The Coalition government was thrown out in May 2022 and although it gained some ground in the last Federal election the resulting infighting and fracture of the Coalition means that they will collectively remain in opposition for a long time.
Albanese has been largely effective but is weak. He has caved in to pressure from various vocal lobby groups and his latest gaffe was to invite the President of the State of Israel for a visit 2 months after the murder of 14 Jews and 1 Gentile at Bondi Beach.
The vast majority of Australians do not support Israel’s ongoing compaign of destruction in Gaza and are justifiably offended by this visit.
Are we really heading for war? I suspect not in the near future.
As for the proposed sell-off of Defence establishments: I say go for it. I worked for 14 years as a civilian contractor initially at Victoria Barracks in Sydney and came to the conclusion that it is an expensive white elephant which serves little purpose. The East coast submarine base was flogged off 30+ years ago without any comment and HMAS Penguin on the other side of the harbour is a hive of inactivity since the naval hospital closed down.
I don’t hear any talk of the major bases in the West or in Darwin coming under threat of closure.
Defence is infamous for wasting public money hand over fist. I finally quit (among other reasons) over the ineffective stupidity and cowardice of some of my uniformed masters and their civilian accomplices. I will say no more about that.
I’d like to see Penny Wong as PM. Unfortunately not a hope since she is female, lesbian and of Asian descent.
So that’s my 2 bob’s worth. Make of it what you will.
I did throw down the gauntlet and I really appreciate your response You strike me as an interesting person!
You say the swing to the right is exaggerated, put current polling is showing One Nation at something like 27%, not 5%.
Why do you think that is?
Personally I don't think Pauline Hansen has the X factor to be PM but they may get more seats at the next election if things keep going the way they are.
When you say you don't think we'll be going to war anytime soon do you mean you think China is bluffing on a Taiwan invasion or the US is bluffing on defending if it happens?
Good inside info on defence sell-offs. Thank you.
I think Penny Wong could have the x-factor for PM. I don't think the majority of people really care about policies. I think they just want a PM they can think - yeah - they could be our rep.
I think the coalition is in shambles because they don't have the X factor person leading, and their policies weren't hugely different from Labour except for nuclear power. But things are changing as we speak. Could be an interesting next election.
Hot button topics like climate change, immigration, energy supply, tax could change things.
But you know what worries me the most? Our national debt spiralling.
It's happening everywhere. There is an underlying issue going on there.
Why is your national debt more worrying to you than climate change? Given the wildfires and the economy's reliance on agriculture, surely climate change is an existential threat on another level? To say nothing of the impact on Indigenous Australians and Torres Strait Islanders.
Rupert Murdoch has been promoting right wing ideas with little regard for accuracy or balance since the eighties; but I think his efforts took a step up when he started Fox News.
When I was younger the idea that there was no objective truth and everyone was biased was associated with some of the more excitable parts of the left. Fox News was the first major right wing outlet to explicitly run with the idea that facts that the right wing don't like are just as biased as the ideas they do; and therefore what have later been dubbed "alternative facts" are fine.
I'll add in climate change denial think-tanks, and Russian troll farms. I would guess that Russian troll farms do post stuff in support of the authoritarian left such as George Galloway; but the known instances are in support of right-wing causes, such as Brexit and Trump. Russia likes anything that reduces international solidarity among liberal democracies, which the far right does.
Rupert Murdoch has been around for decades. The polling high of One Nation is a very recent thing in Australia.
China likes anything that reduces solidarity amongst liberal democracies as well.
I don't think the far right reduces solidarity except to shake up the status quo which is no longer working for a lot of people.
Could you explain how solidarity between eg racial groups isn't affected by the far right? This seems like an odd claim when the far right actively campaign on the basis of a lack of solidarity between various groups.
Working-class white Australians have far more in common with working-class Asian people for example. There's also the pretty huge elephant in the room of the fact that non-Indigenous Australians are living on stolen land, yet the far right act like white blokes called Darren are the true indigenous people of Australia. The far right are a plague everywhere, but they have a bloody cheek in places where white people are literally colonisers and invaders.
In what way is the 'status quo' not working for many people @WhimsicalChristian?
My relatives in Australia have a lovely house with a sea view that would cost at least twice as much in such a prime location here in the UK.
Their daughter has been able to buy the house next door thanks to some judicious property buying.
Hats off to them.
Yet all I heard was 'whinge, whine, moan, Albanese this, Albanese that, immigrants this, Aboriginals that, Indians this, Pakistanis that, Muslims ...'
Where are they getting these ideas from? What have they got to complain about? In what way us the 'status quo' letting them down?
Plenty of people in Australia and elsewhere would give their eye-teeth to live where they do and have the lifestyle they have. Yet all they do is complain that everything is going to Hell in a handcart.
A friend of ours over there visits an old lady on a run-down housing estate on the wrong side of Adelaide. It was pretty grim but no worse than anything I've seen here.
People there would have the right to complain about things.
I don't see what affluent Aussies have got to complain about, unless it's other people having what they want to keep for themselves.
I think the status quo isn't working in many ways. Health, education, job security, housing, food. All the things that people take for granted are essentials. I used to think the system was working before our son became sick. I had honestly believed that if people were struggling they must be doing something wrong, but I no longer believe that.
We have a system of private and public health. For many years we had private health insurance until I realised we were throwing good money after bad. Even though we had the insurance we couldn't afford to use it. Gap to be paid for hospital stays and for allied health things too. However, if you are in an accident or acutely ill, hospital does work. It's once you are discharged that things get messy, time consuming to manage and expensive for allied health or additional care.
When son was sick I used all my long service leave, holidays and annual leave because the then less than $100 per week was not going to compensate for the income I would lose and worse if I had to give up my job. We were just lucky that I had worked for 20 years in government jobs otherwise I wouldn't have had leave, would have had to sell our home (being on one income), and even private rent in our suburb had increased four fold in the 10 years since we had purchased our house. It was terrifying.
The National Disability and Insurance Scheme is another whole ball game. People pay out big money for tests and reports and the people working in the system don't read them due to time constraints and other pressures. It's a lot like Alex Brooker saying he has to be reviewed every few years and guess what, he still has his limb issues. Basically I think the government didn't have a really good handle on how many people live with disability and thus grossly underestimated how complex and difficult running a really good system would be. Not the fault of those needing assistance, but a lot of it relies on paying for advocacy if you don't have a really good family who will do the hard yards to get services and fight against services being cut.
Education is a complex issue that worries me a lot. I think we now use it as a way of managing social issues, rather than teaching for academic excellence and in recent times there has been a return to explicit instruction, because we are no doing well in international tables of success. Kids in school who need actual assistance with learning do not get it because a lot of funds are directed (in public schools) to behaviour management programs. There is also no reporting of money spent against how kids are improving and developing. Or if there is it's not reported to parents and there are many siloes which prevent any continuity of information being passed on. Outside hospital school, in my territory Ed staff were basically unaware of how many kids are ill, how many travel interstate for medical treatment or how that impacts their learning. Der. Getting change is like pushing poo uphill with a teaspoon.
Because we live in a public service town, our daughter was lucky to get a job post uni, moving from labour hire, to a permanent casual to a permanent full time position. Her income is a lot more than I ever earnt, but she will need to pay roughly 400k to get into property, probably a one bedroom apartment, she doesn't need much more, but that is in my book, a huge amount of money. When husband and I bought property in our 20's we paid 1.5 times our joint income for our first home. She will have to pay 5 times her post tax income for something much, much less in terms of quality of life. She'll get a one bedder with a balcony and hopefully not built by a rubbishy developer. We bought a 3 bedroom house with a garden. It did have issues but it was already 80 years old when we bought it.
Husband and I moved to a larger home about 8 years ago for the reason that we could see how both kids could live here together and have separate spaces if they could never afford to move out of home. We hope to pay this house off with a couple of bequests in the works, but maybe not, in which we'll have to use our pension savings. I think young people are particularly despondent about housing. I constantly look at listings in large rural centres as a way of them getting a foot in the door, but so do investors and they have a lot more resources than we do. We are not really in the position to be the bank of Mum and Dad.
So I think people are generally ticked off (mild language, insert sweary of own choice). Stupid things like our country getting more tax from beer sales than the sale of our gas to countries overseas, who sell it on to make profits for themselves (just heard on radio this morning). What the heck???? Which stupidos passed the legislation allowing for that??
A divorced friend lives in a converted garage, which has issues every time it rains and they pay about $500 per week to rent that and thus no real security of housing, bler.
My parents lived on one income. They had a modest house and my sister and I didn't get tertiary education, yet if we could get secure jobs in theory we would be OK. We went to public schools, both completed year 12 but parents were not switched on enough to get Mum back into work and pay for Uni, the biggest cost being for living out of home. That's ok, we still were one step more than Mum was able to achieve educationally. What they hadn't banked on was the world changing, automation, loss of jobs, requirement for higher education and more people living as singles rather than in a coupled arrangement. My kids will probably have a lesser lifestyle than we've had (and believe me, not a lot of style in my life as a carer) if they move away from our home city or move out of the family home. I find it very worrying and see very little in the way of solutions from either side of government. The only 2 people I respect in our Parliament both have the surname Pocock, the others can all get in the bin.
Sure, @Cheery Gardener I'm not saying that there aren't problems in Australia - and indeed the issues you highlight have parallels here and I'm sure in many Westernised countries around the world.
I saw instances of hardship among white Australians while I was over there - the old lady I mentioned that my well-meaning friends visit regularly despite a 35 mile round trip.
What I don't see are any efforts by the right or the far right to address these issues. As far as I can see, whether in Australia or over here, the stock-in-trade on the right of the political spectrum is to bloviate, whine, whinge and try to convince everyone that everything is shit and it's all the fault of liberal lefties, migrants and anyone and everyone else and nothing at all to do with them or their make-the-rich-richer policies.
I'm by no means a raving lefty and think there are issues to be addressed on the left and squidgy centre. We need to get our own houses in order.
I suppose the question comes down to which end of the political spectrum would you expect to address the kind of issues you raise @Cheery Gardener.
Would a populist right-wing government provide the solutions?
GG, Cheery Gardener is right here at the moment and I have no doubt that she is savvy enough not to be sucked in by the idea that a “right wing populist government” will be the panacea for our ills, such as they are.
You may not realise that her 2 preferred pollies are an Independent Senator for the Australian Capital Territory and a Greens senator for South Australia.
That says a great deal. Don’t underestimate her intelligence.
I think this conversation does highlight the problem for centrists - their whole ideology is built around the idea that things are basically fine under the neo-liberal economic order, with just a few tweaks needed here or better management there. More and more people can see the cracks appearing and centrism lacks answers, and only has the rhetorical weapons to attack the left, which it's used continually for 40 years plus. The rise of the populist right triggers their usual response to a threat to the right - triangulation - which does nothing to address the material conditions giving rise to discontent.
What this conversation really highlights is how little understanding people in the UK have about the political scene ( not to mention the social make-up) here in Oz.
What this conversation really highlights is how little understanding people in the UK have about the political scene ( not to mention the social make-up) here in Oz.
Yep. Holding my hands up; you got me. I'll shut up.
I'm always happy to read the responses of others whether they agree with me or not, so keep them coming!!
I think I am probably a bit of a leftie and a bleeding heart, but it's only in recent years that I've begun thinking about the situations experienced by those I might have "othered" in the past. I'm not proud of that, and hope to be doing better!
I know that my post was probably more Epiphanies than Purgatory, but I think I was trying to make a couple of points. That all policy is personal and that many thankfully don't experience the shortcomings of policy. If disaster strikes it's a pretty big learning curve! I have had many tearing my hair out days since son was first sick in 2003.
I often worry that policy writers or legislation makers who come from privilege don't have the input needed to create policy that's not going to make the life of others more burdensome, messy and difficult. In many instances I don't care which side of politics is prepared to do the work and honestly try to find solutions. However I think that kind of genuine interest is often just not there and even if people begin with good intentions, it must be so wearing trying to assist constituents and work out whether policy needs adjusting or not.
When we think of what we consider to be privilege I think everyone will have their own interpretation of what that means. I actually consider that I have it myself. I'm not highly educated, but I am white, I am existing in a culture that's familiar to me, I do everything in my native language, I had income (even if it was small) and I had a network of good people around me. Had we had to deal with our son's situation in a 2nd language, or been unwaged or in a situation of social isolation I can see how things may have gone so much more badly than they did. We are grateful for every friend and acquaintance who stepped up to help us.
I have also sat in meetings with advisors and participated in discussions around situations relevant or similar to our own. I was surprised by which party's representatives stayed for the whole thing. It may be that some of the attendees had other meetings to get to, or were called away by their member to do something else, but it was interesting and gave new insights into the day to day stuff of what goes on in the big house.
I am glad to see the rise of the Teals and the Independents, and a good sized cross bench because they are the people who will hopefully hold fire to the feet of those who are a bit too comfortable in their own roles and electorates. Shake em up!!
I'm sure there will be Aussies here who would be more than happy to debate these things with you and I'm sure they will do so in due course.
That they may not have done so far won't be out of fear of 'cancellation' though.
It takes a while to figure out how the Ship operates and it's sometimes best to sit tight and listen before diving in. I say that to myself.
As far as Australian politics goes, my observation is that there isn't much going on over there that is substantially different to what we are seeing over here, essentially a backlash against the liberal left and a lurch to the right in a populist kind of way.
Those on the left are saying the 'Overton Window' has shifted to the right. Those on the right are saying it's shifted to the left.
It all depends on where you stand.
But the right in western liberal democracies has only recently gained traction, as we can see from so many countries in Europe going right.
Historically, that is saying something. What I find interesting is what it is saying. It's more than just an opinion from where you stand because there has been a significant shift.
It's saying that malign actors have a (mostly financial, but in some cases ideological) interest in wrecking western liberal democracy and have realised how cheap and effective media manipulation is in the internet age. Sure, they partly amplify existing trends, but in terms of objective impact and cost very few people would, for example, give a shit about asylum seekers coming to the UK. People only even notice because of the constant wail of a far right media and their allied (probably not directly but who knows) army of influencers and bots. In a lot of ways I suspect they learned lessons from the tactics used by Salafists online to encourage extremism among Muslims, but amplified by the remorseless march of social media algorithms.
I think that's a convenient cop out.
If you think I'm wrong explain how.
You're blaming malign actors. You're saying it's not a real popular shift to the right.
You could use the same excuse for anything, left, right, centre, China, Russia etc etc.
I think this conversation does highlight the problem for centrists - their whole ideology is built around the idea that things are basically fine under the neo-liberal economic order, with just a few tweaks needed here or better management there. More and more people can see the cracks appearing and centrism lacks answers, and only has the rhetorical weapons to attack the left, which it's used continually for 40 years plus. The rise of the populist right triggers their usual response to a threat to the right - triangulation - which does nothing to address the material conditions giving rise to discontent.
One Nation is clear about trying to address those material issues with lots of policies.
In my view the restriction on foreign ownership is a big plus for them.
Split income tax is a biggie too. I think they're the only ones doing that.
I'm always happy to read the responses of others whether they agree with me or not, so keep them coming!!
I think I am probably a bit of a leftie and a bleeding heart, but it's only in recent years that I've begun thinking about the situations experienced by those I might have "othered" in the past. I'm not proud of that, and hope to be doing better!
I know that my post was probably more Epiphanies than Purgatory, but I think I was trying to make a couple of points. That all policy is personal and that many thankfully don't experience the shortcomings of policy. If disaster strikes it's a pretty big learning curve! I have had many tearing my hair out days since son was first sick in 2003.
I often worry that policy writers or legislation makers who come from privilege don't have the input needed to create policy that's not going to make the life of others more burdensome, messy and difficult. In many instances I don't care which side of politics is prepared to do the work and honestly try to find solutions. However I think that kind of genuine interest is often just not there and even if people begin with good intentions, it must be so wearing trying to assist constituents and work out whether policy needs adjusting or not.
When we think of what we consider to be privilege I think everyone will have their own interpretation of what that means. I actually consider that I have it myself. I'm not highly educated, but I am white, I am existing in a culture that's familiar to me, I do everything in my native language, I had income (even if it was small) and I had a network of good people around me. Had we had to deal with our son's situation in a 2nd language, or been unwaged or in a situation of social isolation I can see how things may have gone so much more badly than they did. We are grateful for every friend and acquaintance who stepped up to help us.
I have also sat in meetings with advisors and participated in discussions around situations relevant or similar to our own. I was surprised by which party's representatives stayed for the whole thing. It may be that some of the attendees had other meetings to get to, or were called away by their member to do something else, but it was interesting and gave new insights into the day to day stuff of what goes on in the big house.
I am glad to see the rise of the Teals and the Independents, and a good sized cross bench because they are the people who will hopefully hold fire to the feet of those who are a bit too comfortable in their own roles and electorates. Shake em up!!
Ok. Apologies to @Cheery Gardener and @Sojourner if it sounded like I was questioning CG's intelligence. That wasn't my intention.
At the risk of digging myself into a deeper hole, my 'populist right' comment was aimed at @WhimsicalChristian who appears, at face value, to at least give them credit for some of their ideas.
If we are going to 'triangulate' the argument then if @Arethosemyfeet is aiming his comments about 'centrists' at me - squidgy old me - then I am reliably informed that back in the day a lot of the concerns about Vietnamese boat people and other south-east Asian migrants came from elements on the Australian left.
Whatever else we might say about him, Whitlam was hardly known for tact, diplomacy and what we might consider 'politically-correct' views for want of a better term.
Populism is never a good option from whichever side it comes.
But all that said, I readily concede along with @Arethosemyfeet that I don't understand all the socio-political nuances of a land down under.
I'm not sure if you are a One Nation supporter, Whimsical Christian, and you don't have to share if you don't want to. However I am interested if you find any of these policies problematic particularly on the environment, TGA and NDIS. And what is your opinion of Pauline Hanson's attitudes towards Indigenous Australians.
I will note here that I have never been asked to fix the alcohol and drug addictions of other white Australians, but I have a Yorta Yorta friend who regularly is asked how we should fix the problems of Indigenous people in the Northern Territory, even though she has never been there.
I've never voted One Nation Mili. Never knew much about them until they arrived quite startlingly in the polls recently. Just below labour atm!
That's saying something about the mood of Australians and that interests me.
Btw, if you want to know what One Nation's policies are, it's best to directly to their own website rather than being filtered by the ABC, which has a definite bias to the left. Go the source as it were.
Last election I voted for the Libertarians. Used to be liberal democrats I believe. I think they're economically right and socially liberal. Not into everything they think but thought they were the best option at the time. But I'm only with .5% of the Australian population that did so so I'm not very mainstream.
Strong government control is what gets my hackles up, regardless of whether they're left or right.
... At the risk of digging myself into a deeper hole, my 'populist right' comment was aimed at @WhimsicalChristian who appears, at face value, to at least give them credit for some of their ideas ...
He does, doesn't he. He gives all the appearance of someone who wants to vote PHON, but doesn't want to admit it in decent company. As for the ABC having a bias to the left - 🙄
... At the risk of digging myself into a deeper hole, my 'populist right' comment was aimed at @WhimsicalChristian who appears, at face value, to at least give them credit for some of their ideas ...
He does, doesn't he. He gives all the appearance of someone who wants to vote PHON, but doesn't want to admit it in decent company. As for the ABC having a bias to the left - 🙄
Sounds like you think a lot of your fellow Australians are indecent company.
@WhimsicalChristian every source has bias. That doesn't make it inherently untrustworthy. If a political party has a policy that will damage a particular group, they're not usually going to state on their website that they want to damage that group - even if it's pretty obvious that it will do that. No villain thinks they're a villain.
I also don't see the issue with just stating that Australia has a racism problem. Stating that doesn't mean that other countries don't have a racism problem, nor does it mean that you're (general you) ignoring anti-racism movements within Australia. You can't work to excise racism if you won't admit how deep-seated the problem is.
It's clearly been an issue for a long long time. A friend's (white) brother lived in Australia (in several places) during the 2000s and was shocked at how casually white Australians from all backgrounds would use racial slurs and how normalised racist talk was - and this guy is from Bradford (in the UK) so not exactly a stranger to areas with racial tensions. This isn't to say that the UK doesn't have a problem with racism - extremely far from it - but the "it's just a few bad apples" argument is not believable. Indeed, Australia has a pretty expected level of racism given the fact that it's a mostly-white country established on stolen land in a white supremacist society - and especially given the culture around getting along with people and not making a fuss about experiencing ill-treatment (such as racism).
... At the risk of digging myself into a deeper hole, my 'populist right' comment was aimed at @WhimsicalChristian who appears, at face value, to at least give them credit for some of their ideas ...
He does, doesn't he. He gives all the appearance of someone who wants to vote PHON, but doesn't want to admit it in decent company. As for the ABC having a bias to the left - 🙄
My relatives and other Aussies thought ABC was very left wing.
Yes, I kind of guessed Whimsical Christian would say the same! People can google the ON website if they want to read more on their policies, but knowing most of the ship is left leaning or centre right I don't think it will sway anyone's voting choices!
The ON website is pretty polished, but their candidates social media feeds are more enlightening, especially Bernie Finn. He posts a lot of pro Trump and Maga stuff.
Last election I voted for the Libertarians. Used to be liberal democrats I believe. I think they're economically right and socially liberal. Not into everything they think but thought they were the best option at the time. But I'm only with .5% of the Australian population that did so so I'm not very mainstream.
That's interesting. I know one other Libertarian who comes from the so called souless suburbs where I am from, but lives overseas now. He seems to have moved further right lately, but not on all issues.
Personally I think Libertarianism would favour those already in power and their policies don't seem so lighthearted to everyone else. But I'm no fan of Anarchists for the same reason.
@WhimsicalChristian every source has bias. That doesn't make it inherently untrustworthy. If a political party has a policy that will damage a particular group, they're not usually going to state on their website that they want to damage that group - even if it's pretty obvious that it will do that. No villain thinks they're a villain.
It's pretty standard practice that if you are going to go against what someone says, you need to find out what they are saying first. Go to the source. Don't get it second hand from a source that is clearly not on your side.
Certainly in academia a secondhand source is never as good as a first hand source.
Yes, I kind of guessed Whimsical Christian would say the same! People can google the ON website if they want to read more on their policies, but knowing most of the ship is left leaning or centre right I don't think it will sway anyone's voting choices!
The ON website is pretty polished, but their candidates social media feeds are more enlightening, especially Bernie Finn. He posts a lot of pro Trump and Maga stuff.
There are people on the ship that are centre right? Really? Where are they!
I think a lot of trumps economic and foreign policies are good. Doesn't mean I approve of everything he does or says.
You don't have to be 100% for or against anything. That's not the truth of things. But it is the way people seem to operate these days.
Makes conversation virtually impossible cos you just get cancelled.
@WhimsicalChristian every source has bias. That doesn't make it inherently untrustworthy. If a political party has a policy that will damage a particular group, they're not usually going to state on their website that they want to damage that group - even if it's pretty obvious that it will do that. No villain thinks they're a villain.
It's pretty standard practice that if you are going to go against what someone says, you need to find out what they are saying first. Go to the source. Don't get it second hand from a source that is clearly not on your side.
Ah, so when North Korea tells us it's democratic we should believe them rather than the defectors telling us about terrible conditions under a totalitarian dictatorship?
I also don't see the issue with just stating that Australia has a racism problem. Stating that doesn't mean that other countries don't have a racism problem, nor does it mean that you're (general you) ignoring anti-racism movements within Australia. You can't work to excise racism if you won't admit how deep-seated the problem is.
It's clearly been an issue for a long long time. A friend's (white) brother lived in Australia (in several places) during the 2000s and was shocked at how casually white Australians from all backgrounds would use racial slurs and how normalised racist talk was - and this guy is from Bradford (in the UK) so not exactly a stranger to areas with racial tensions. This isn't to say that the UK doesn't have a problem with racism - extremely far from it - but the "it's just a few bad apples" argument is not believable. Indeed, Australia has a pretty expected level of racism given the fact that it's a mostly-white country established on stolen land in a white supremacist society - and especially given the culture around getting along with people and not making a fuss about experiencing ill-treatment (such as racism).
@WhimsicalChristian every source has bias. That doesn't make it inherently untrustworthy. If a political party has a policy that will damage a particular group, they're not usually going to state on their website that they want to damage that group - even if it's pretty obvious that it will do that. No villain thinks they're a villain.
It's pretty standard practice that if you are going to go against what someone says, you need to find out what they are saying first. Go to the source. Don't get it second hand from a source that is clearly not on your side.
Ah, so when North Korea tells us it's democratic we should believe them rather than the defectors telling us about terrible conditions under a totalitarian dictatorship?
Not the same at all for a totalitarian regime and you know it.
Still good to know what the spin is tho from the source.
There are people on the ship that are centre right? Really? Where are they!
I think a lot of trumps economic and foreign policies are good. Doesn't mean I approve of everything he does or says.
You don't have to be 100% for or against anything. That's not the truth of things. But it is the way people seem to operate these days.
Makes conversation virtually impossible cos you just get cancelled.
Yes there are centre right shipmates, even if they are a minority.
As someone with different political views than most here what attracted you to the ship in the first place? It's a small, aging forum with an even smaller number of Australians. You seem to enjoy making light of issues that make people here highly anxious about the state of the world so I'm not sure if you are looking for genuine engagement or just seeing if you get banned so you have proof left wingers are anti-free speech.
@WhimsicalChristian every source has bias. That doesn't make it inherently untrustworthy. If a political party has a policy that will damage a particular group, they're not usually going to state on their website that they want to damage that group - even if it's pretty obvious that it will do that. No villain thinks they're a villain.
It's pretty standard practice that if you are going to go against what someone says, you need to find out what they are saying first. Go to the source. Don't get it second hand from a source that is clearly not on your side.
Certainly in academia a secondhand source is never as good as a first hand source.
Same applies to personal relationships.
It's absolutely not the case that secondary sources are less trustworthy or less useful than primary sources - any historian would tell you that. In many cases they are more useful. Also, nobody suggested to not see what ON say about themselves in addition to what others say about them.
I'm not sure how primary and secondary sources would apply to a personal relationship.
Yes, I kind of guessed Whimsical Christian would say the same! People can google the ON website if they want to read more on their policies, but knowing most of the ship is left leaning or centre right I don't think it will sway anyone's voting choices!
The ON website is pretty polished, but their candidates social media feeds are more enlightening, especially Bernie Finn. He posts a lot of pro Trump and Maga stuff.
There are people on the ship that are centre right? Really? Where are they!
I think a lot of trumps economic and foreign policies are good. Doesn't mean I approve of everything he does or says.
You don't have to be 100% for or against anything. That's not the truth of things. But it is the way people seem to operate these days.
Makes conversation virtually impossible cos you just get cancelled.
What specific Trumpian policies do you approve of? And what does said cancellation look like, in practical terms?
I also don't see the issue with just stating that Australia has a racism problem. Stating that doesn't mean that other countries don't have a racism problem, nor does it mean that you're (general you) ignoring anti-racism movements within Australia. You can't work to excise racism if you won't admit how deep-seated the problem is.
It's clearly been an issue for a long long time. A friend's (white) brother lived in Australia (in several places) during the 2000s and was shocked at how casually white Australians from all backgrounds would use racial slurs and how normalised racist talk was - and this guy is from Bradford (in the UK) so not exactly a stranger to areas with racial tensions. This isn't to say that the UK doesn't have a problem with racism - extremely far from it - but the "it's just a few bad apples" argument is not believable. Indeed, Australia has a pretty expected level of racism given the fact that it's a mostly-white country established on stolen land in a white supremacist society - and especially given the culture around getting along with people and not making a fuss about experiencing ill-treatment (such as racism).
Are you an Australian?
Doesn't sound like you are.
Why does it matter? What things have I said that are incorrect?
@WhimsicalChristian every source has bias. That doesn't make it inherently untrustworthy. If a political party has a policy that will damage a particular group, they're not usually going to state on their website that they want to damage that group - even if it's pretty obvious that it will do that. No villain thinks they're a villain.
It's pretty standard practice that if you are going to go against what someone says, you need to find out what they are saying first. Go to the source. Don't get it second hand from a source that is clearly not on your side.
Ah, so when North Korea tells us it's democratic we should believe them rather than the defectors telling us about terrible conditions under a totalitarian dictatorship?
Not the same at all for a totalitarian regime and you know it.
Same principle. You don't take an organisation's propaganda at face value.
Comments
I did throw down the gauntlet and I really appreciate your response
You say the swing to the right is exaggerated, put current polling is showing One Nation at something like 27%, not 5%.
Why do you think that is?
Personally I don't think Pauline Hansen has the X factor to be PM but they may get more seats at the next election if things keep going the way they are.
When you say you don't think we'll be going to war anytime soon do you mean you think China is bluffing on a Taiwan invasion or the US is bluffing on defending if it happens?
Good inside info on defence sell-offs. Thank you.
I think Penny Wong could have the x-factor for PM. I don't think the majority of people really care about policies. I think they just want a PM they can think - yeah - they could be our rep.
I think the coalition is in shambles because they don't have the X factor person leading, and their policies weren't hugely different from Labour except for nuclear power. But things are changing as we speak. Could be an interesting next election.
Hot button topics like climate change, immigration, energy supply, tax could change things.
But you know what worries me the most? Our national debt spiralling.
It's happening everywhere. There is an underlying issue going on there.
It's saying that malign actors have a (mostly financial, but in some cases ideological) interest in wrecking western liberal democracy and have realised how cheap and effective media manipulation is in the internet age. Sure, they partly amplify existing trends, but in terms of objective impact and cost very few people would, for example, give a shit about asylum seekers coming to the UK. People only even notice because of the constant wail of a far right media and their allied (probably not directly but who knows) army of influencers and bots. In a lot of ways I suspect they learned lessons from the tactics used by Salafists online to encourage extremism among Muslims, but amplified by the remorseless march of social media algorithms.
When I was younger the idea that there was no objective truth and everyone was biased was associated with some of the more excitable parts of the left. Fox News was the first major right wing outlet to explicitly run with the idea that facts that the right wing don't like are just as biased as the ideas they do; and therefore what have later been dubbed "alternative facts" are fine.
I'll add in climate change denial think-tanks, and Russian troll farms. I would guess that Russian troll farms do post stuff in support of the authoritarian left such as George Galloway; but the known instances are in support of right-wing causes, such as Brexit and Trump. Russia likes anything that reduces international solidarity among liberal democracies, which the far right does.
Heck, the UK and US had very right-wing governments under both Thatcher and Reagan.
Australia has had fairly right-wing governments within living memory too.
What I think is new and more recent is the level of populism involved. The left isn't immune to that tendency though either.
Australian Shipmates will forgive me for mentioning this and I don't mean to cause offence, but one of the things that struck me during my visit was the amount of public art and memorials commemorating this, that or the other - something not unique to Australia of course.
I saw several very effusive public monuments and art installations celebrating the achievements and contribution of Vietnamese boat-people for instance.
But it's not that long ago that I remember hawkish Aussie voices calling for those boats to be intercepted, sunk or turned back and their occupants marooned or detained on inhospitable islands.
Yes, paradox abounds.
A rather right-wing Australian PM brought in strict gun-ownership legislation for instance.
Arguably not strict enough, but ...
The truly dreadful Adelaide daily paper was full of condemnatory editorials and letters which held him responsible, something some of the grief-stricken relatives of the victims said of course.
It didn't matter how many times I pointed out that the killers were jihadists and not radicalised pro-Palestinian protestors and that a Muslim had tried to tackle and disarm one of the gunmen, it was all Albanese's fault.
Anyone would have thought he'd pulled the triggers himself.
Now he's coming in for some stick for arranging an Israeli visit and for the violence that broke out between police and protestors.
The bloke can't win whatever he does.
I wouldn't swap places with him for all the tea in China.
I doubt whether he loses any sleep over the criticisms and sniping. You need a thick hide to be a pollie.
I think even he realised that another mass shooting would have sunk the Coalition ship.
I have to smile when I recall the same right wing PM giving the nod for public funding of the human papillomavirus vaccine 20-odd years ago- after his wife required a hysterectomy for cervical cancer.
That’s on the public record, by the way.
I think that's a convenient cop out.
Although you do mention partly amplifying existing trends.
Rupert Murdoch has been around for decades. The polling high of One Nation is a very recent thing in Australia.
China likes anything that reduces solidarity amongst liberal democracies as well.
I don't think the far right reduces solidarity except to shake up the status quo which is no longer working for a lot of people.
If you think I'm wrong explain how.
Why is your national debt more worrying to you than climate change? Given the wildfires and the economy's reliance on agriculture, surely climate change is an existential threat on another level? To say nothing of the impact on Indigenous Australians and Torres Strait Islanders.
Could you explain how solidarity between eg racial groups isn't affected by the far right? This seems like an odd claim when the far right actively campaign on the basis of a lack of solidarity between various groups.
Working-class white Australians have far more in common with working-class Asian people for example. There's also the pretty huge elephant in the room of the fact that non-Indigenous Australians are living on stolen land, yet the far right act like white blokes called Darren are the true indigenous people of Australia. The far right are a plague everywhere, but they have a bloody cheek in places where white people are literally colonisers and invaders.
My relatives in Australia have a lovely house with a sea view that would cost at least twice as much in such a prime location here in the UK.
Their daughter has been able to buy the house next door thanks to some judicious property buying.
Hats off to them.
Yet all I heard was 'whinge, whine, moan, Albanese this, Albanese that, immigrants this, Aboriginals that, Indians this, Pakistanis that, Muslims ...'
Where are they getting these ideas from? What have they got to complain about? In what way us the 'status quo' letting them down?
Plenty of people in Australia and elsewhere would give their eye-teeth to live where they do and have the lifestyle they have. Yet all they do is complain that everything is going to Hell in a handcart.
A friend of ours over there visits an old lady on a run-down housing estate on the wrong side of Adelaide. It was pretty grim but no worse than anything I've seen here.
People there would have the right to complain about things.
I don't see what affluent Aussies have got to complain about, unless it's other people having what they want to keep for themselves.
We have a system of private and public health. For many years we had private health insurance until I realised we were throwing good money after bad. Even though we had the insurance we couldn't afford to use it. Gap to be paid for hospital stays and for allied health things too. However, if you are in an accident or acutely ill, hospital does work. It's once you are discharged that things get messy, time consuming to manage and expensive for allied health or additional care.
When son was sick I used all my long service leave, holidays and annual leave because the then less than $100 per week was not going to compensate for the income I would lose and worse if I had to give up my job. We were just lucky that I had worked for 20 years in government jobs otherwise I wouldn't have had leave, would have had to sell our home (being on one income), and even private rent in our suburb had increased four fold in the 10 years since we had purchased our house. It was terrifying.
The National Disability and Insurance Scheme is another whole ball game. People pay out big money for tests and reports and the people working in the system don't read them due to time constraints and other pressures. It's a lot like Alex Brooker saying he has to be reviewed every few years and guess what, he still has his limb issues. Basically I think the government didn't have a really good handle on how many people live with disability and thus grossly underestimated how complex and difficult running a really good system would be. Not the fault of those needing assistance, but a lot of it relies on paying for advocacy if you don't have a really good family who will do the hard yards to get services and fight against services being cut.
Education is a complex issue that worries me a lot. I think we now use it as a way of managing social issues, rather than teaching for academic excellence and in recent times there has been a return to explicit instruction, because we are no doing well in international tables of success. Kids in school who need actual assistance with learning do not get it because a lot of funds are directed (in public schools) to behaviour management programs. There is also no reporting of money spent against how kids are improving and developing. Or if there is it's not reported to parents and there are many siloes which prevent any continuity of information being passed on. Outside hospital school, in my territory Ed staff were basically unaware of how many kids are ill, how many travel interstate for medical treatment or how that impacts their learning. Der. Getting change is like pushing poo uphill with a teaspoon.
Because we live in a public service town, our daughter was lucky to get a job post uni, moving from labour hire, to a permanent casual to a permanent full time position. Her income is a lot more than I ever earnt, but she will need to pay roughly 400k to get into property, probably a one bedroom apartment, she doesn't need much more, but that is in my book, a huge amount of money. When husband and I bought property in our 20's we paid 1.5 times our joint income for our first home. She will have to pay 5 times her post tax income for something much, much less in terms of quality of life. She'll get a one bedder with a balcony and hopefully not built by a rubbishy developer. We bought a 3 bedroom house with a garden. It did have issues but it was already 80 years old when we bought it.
Husband and I moved to a larger home about 8 years ago for the reason that we could see how both kids could live here together and have separate spaces if they could never afford to move out of home. We hope to pay this house off with a couple of bequests in the works, but maybe not, in which we'll have to use our pension savings. I think young people are particularly despondent about housing. I constantly look at listings in large rural centres as a way of them getting a foot in the door, but so do investors and they have a lot more resources than we do. We are not really in the position to be the bank of Mum and Dad.
So I think people are generally ticked off (mild language, insert sweary of own choice). Stupid things like our country getting more tax from beer sales than the sale of our gas to countries overseas, who sell it on to make profits for themselves (just heard on radio this morning). What the heck???? Which stupidos passed the legislation allowing for that??
A divorced friend lives in a converted garage, which has issues every time it rains and they pay about $500 per week to rent that and thus no real security of housing, bler.
My parents lived on one income. They had a modest house and my sister and I didn't get tertiary education, yet if we could get secure jobs in theory we would be OK. We went to public schools, both completed year 12 but parents were not switched on enough to get Mum back into work and pay for Uni, the biggest cost being for living out of home. That's ok, we still were one step more than Mum was able to achieve educationally. What they hadn't banked on was the world changing, automation, loss of jobs, requirement for higher education and more people living as singles rather than in a coupled arrangement. My kids will probably have a lesser lifestyle than we've had (and believe me, not a lot of style in my life as a carer) if they move away from our home city or move out of the family home. I find it very worrying and see very little in the way of solutions from either side of government. The only 2 people I respect in our Parliament both have the surname Pocock, the others can all get in the bin.
I saw instances of hardship among white Australians while I was over there - the old lady I mentioned that my well-meaning friends visit regularly despite a 35 mile round trip.
What I don't see are any efforts by the right or the far right to address these issues. As far as I can see, whether in Australia or over here, the stock-in-trade on the right of the political spectrum is to bloviate, whine, whinge and try to convince everyone that everything is shit and it's all the fault of liberal lefties, migrants and anyone and everyone else and nothing at all to do with them or their make-the-rich-richer policies.
I'm by no means a raving lefty and think there are issues to be addressed on the left and squidgy centre. We need to get our own houses in order.
I suppose the question comes down to which end of the political spectrum would you expect to address the kind of issues you raise @Cheery Gardener.
Would a populist right-wing government provide the solutions?
I very much doubt it.
You may not realise that her 2 preferred pollies are an Independent Senator for the Australian Capital Territory and a Greens senator for South Australia.
That says a great deal. Don’t underestimate her intelligence.
Yep. Holding my hands up; you got me. I'll shut up.
I think I am probably a bit of a leftie and a bleeding heart, but it's only in recent years that I've begun thinking about the situations experienced by those I might have "othered" in the past. I'm not proud of that, and hope to be doing better!
I know that my post was probably more Epiphanies than Purgatory, but I think I was trying to make a couple of points. That all policy is personal and that many thankfully don't experience the shortcomings of policy. If disaster strikes it's a pretty big learning curve! I have had many tearing my hair out days since son was first sick in 2003.
I often worry that policy writers or legislation makers who come from privilege don't have the input needed to create policy that's not going to make the life of others more burdensome, messy and difficult. In many instances I don't care which side of politics is prepared to do the work and honestly try to find solutions. However I think that kind of genuine interest is often just not there and even if people begin with good intentions, it must be so wearing trying to assist constituents and work out whether policy needs adjusting or not.
When we think of what we consider to be privilege I think everyone will have their own interpretation of what that means. I actually consider that I have it myself. I'm not highly educated, but I am white, I am existing in a culture that's familiar to me, I do everything in my native language, I had income (even if it was small) and I had a network of good people around me. Had we had to deal with our son's situation in a 2nd language, or been unwaged or in a situation of social isolation I can see how things may have gone so much more badly than they did. We are grateful for every friend and acquaintance who stepped up to help us.
I have also sat in meetings with advisors and participated in discussions around situations relevant or similar to our own. I was surprised by which party's representatives stayed for the whole thing. It may be that some of the attendees had other meetings to get to, or were called away by their member to do something else, but it was interesting and gave new insights into the day to day stuff of what goes on in the big house.
I am glad to see the rise of the Teals and the Independents, and a good sized cross bench because they are the people who will hopefully hold fire to the feet of those who are a bit too comfortable in their own roles and electorates. Shake em up!!
You're blaming malign actors. You're saying it's not a real popular shift to the right.
You could use the same excuse for anything, left, right, centre, China, Russia etc etc.
One Nation is clear about trying to address those material issues with lots of policies.
In my view the restriction on foreign ownership is a big plus for them.
Split income tax is a biggie too. I think they're the only ones doing that.
Free speech? Thumbs up.
Yah. Shake up is good.
At the risk of digging myself into a deeper hole, my 'populist right' comment was aimed at @WhimsicalChristian who appears, at face value, to at least give them credit for some of their ideas.
If we are going to 'triangulate' the argument then if @Arethosemyfeet is aiming his comments about 'centrists' at me - squidgy old me - then I am reliably informed that back in the day a lot of the concerns about Vietnamese boat people and other south-east Asian migrants came from elements on the Australian left.
Whatever else we might say about him, Whitlam was hardly known for tact, diplomacy and what we might consider 'politically-correct' views for want of a better term.
Populism is never a good option from whichever side it comes.
But all that said, I readily concede along with @Arethosemyfeet that I don't understand all the socio-political nuances of a land down under.
I'd better run, I'd better take cover.
I'm not sure if you are a One Nation supporter, Whimsical Christian, and you don't have to share if you don't want to. However I am interested if you find any of these policies problematic particularly on the environment, TGA and NDIS. And what is your opinion of Pauline Hanson's attitudes towards Indigenous Australians.
I will note here that I have never been asked to fix the alcohol and drug addictions of other white Australians, but I have a Yorta Yorta friend who regularly is asked how we should fix the problems of Indigenous people in the Northern Territory, even though she has never been there.
That's saying something about the mood of Australians and that interests me.
Btw, if you want to know what One Nation's policies are, it's best to directly to their own website rather than being filtered by the ABC, which has a definite bias to the left. Go the source as it were.
Last election I voted for the Libertarians. Used to be liberal democrats I believe. I think they're economically right and socially liberal. Not into everything they think but thought they were the best option at the time. But I'm only with .5% of the Australian population that did so so I'm not very mainstream.
Strong government control is what gets my hackles up, regardless of whether they're left or right.
He does, doesn't he. He gives all the appearance of someone who wants to vote PHON, but doesn't want to admit it in decent company. As for the ABC having a bias to the left - 🙄
Sounds like you think a lot of your fellow Australians are indecent company.
Democracy sucks huh.
They might have the X factor to get the liberals out of the doldrums.
We really do need an effective opposition for our democracy to be effective (to get back to the original question)
It's clearly been an issue for a long long time. A friend's (white) brother lived in Australia (in several places) during the 2000s and was shocked at how casually white Australians from all backgrounds would use racial slurs and how normalised racist talk was - and this guy is from Bradford (in the UK) so not exactly a stranger to areas with racial tensions. This isn't to say that the UK doesn't have a problem with racism - extremely far from it - but the "it's just a few bad apples" argument is not believable. Indeed, Australia has a pretty expected level of racism given the fact that it's a mostly-white country established on stolen land in a white supremacist society - and especially given the culture around getting along with people and not making a fuss about experiencing ill-treatment (such as racism).
My relatives and other Aussies thought ABC was very left wing.
The ON website is pretty polished, but their candidates social media feeds are more enlightening, especially Bernie Finn. He posts a lot of pro Trump and Maga stuff.
Just Googled ON.
Bloody hell!
That's interesting. I know one other Libertarian who comes from the so called souless suburbs where I am from, but lives overseas now. He seems to have moved further right lately, but not on all issues.
Personally I think Libertarianism would favour those already in power and their policies don't seem so lighthearted to everyone else. But I'm no fan of Anarchists for the same reason.
It's pretty standard practice that if you are going to go against what someone says, you need to find out what they are saying first. Go to the source. Don't get it second hand from a source that is clearly not on your side.
Certainly in academia a secondhand source is never as good as a first hand source.
Same applies to personal relationships.
There are people on the ship that are centre right? Really? Where are they!
I think a lot of trumps economic and foreign policies are good. Doesn't mean I approve of everything he does or says.
You don't have to be 100% for or against anything. That's not the truth of things. But it is the way people seem to operate these days.
Makes conversation virtually impossible cos you just get cancelled.
Ah, so when North Korea tells us it's democratic we should believe them rather than the defectors telling us about terrible conditions under a totalitarian dictatorship?
Are you an Australian?
Doesn't sound like you are.
Not the same at all for a totalitarian regime and you know it.
Still good to know what the spin is tho from the source.
Yes there are centre right shipmates, even if they are a minority.
As someone with different political views than most here what attracted you to the ship in the first place? It's a small, aging forum with an even smaller number of Australians. You seem to enjoy making light of issues that make people here highly anxious about the state of the world so I'm not sure if you are looking for genuine engagement or just seeing if you get banned so you have proof left wingers are anti-free speech.
It's absolutely not the case that secondary sources are less trustworthy or less useful than primary sources - any historian would tell you that. In many cases they are more useful. Also, nobody suggested to not see what ON say about themselves in addition to what others say about them.
I'm not sure how primary and secondary sources would apply to a personal relationship.
What specific Trumpian policies do you approve of? And what does said cancellation look like, in practical terms?
Why does it matter? What things have I said that are incorrect?
Same principle. You don't take an organisation's propaganda at face value.