Almost a year ago I wrote an article about how bayside state areas like Oodgeroo and the federal seat of Bowman, which covers the Redlands City area and could flip towards 3rd options like the Teals or Greens. A lot can happen in the space of a year, yet alone 24 hours in politics! Since that article a TEAL in fact did become Mayor of Redlands in Jos Mitchell, winning a landslide victory against maverick controversial former LNP Bowman MP Andrew Laming on 67% – only securing 33% of the vote from preferences from his conservative aligned running mate Cindy Corrie. This was after I wrote that a TEAL could one day flip votes in Bowman or Oodgeroo. And Labor has begun tanking in the polls.
I still would argue that a third option from the major parties could still do well in seats like Oodgeroo or Bowman one day, long term. There is potential here. Three out of four local representatives are TEAL-like independents on the local Redland City Council. But short term the political reality is that it will be a tough run for a third wave candidate to knock off a candidate from the LNP who has held the seat since 2009, but it’s possible. But the odds are tough are present, though we’ll fight hard on the issues. It was a strong Labor seat for 20 years prior to his when Darryl Briskey (1989-2006) and Phil Weightman (2006–2009) were the MPs. It will be a gradual change to Oodgeroo, which will be a lot of hard work over the long term. It won’t change in the short term due to several factors: Infighting in the ALP has caught up with sitting Cr Tracey Huges who sided against Labor, joining with the LNP voting bloc against Mayor Mitchell on the controversial Birkdale White Water issue.
The sad reality is the ALP will sandbag seats they think they can retain into likely Opposition as polls suggest the LNP winning government on almost 60%. The LNP are likely to retain Oodgeroo, but this might not always be the case. Oodgeroo could one day become a seat that decides the fate of a balance of power in a future hung parliament. Both Teals and Greens have polled better here gradually. The Brisbane bayside always gets written off but its electoral seats and voters just may well decide the fate of a future Queensland’s state election. Not just in Oodgeroo but all bayside seats as I would argue there is no such thing as a safe seat anymore for any major party!
Amanda Stoker (LNP), Irene Henley (ALP), and myself (Greens) core flutes [above] in Cleveland at a Middle Street sign site, QLD
There is certainly potential for an alternative candidate in Oodgeroo, and I am giving it a go as the current Greens candidate in Oodgeroo in October. I believe despite the tough polling it will give voters a democratic alternative! We have a good team of local supporters letterboxing, organizing street signs, and much more.
The Toondah issue has put a lot of people off from voting Labor; if people vote for the Greens, we will ensure to revoke the PDA [Priority Development Application]. We support companies like Sealink proposing to build a simple port upgrade for the ferry and barge services without high rise units in the Ramsar wetlands. Federal Labor deserves some credit under Tanya Plibersek for ruling against the Walker Corporation proposal as Environment Minister to build 3600 units of 10 story buildings in the wetlands.
Some island locals are also upset about the lack of transparency on the Whale Center issue at Pt Lookout on North Stradbroke Island (Minjerribah). Many are also anxious of a post sandmining economy reliant on just eco–tourism after the Pandemic saw numbers reduced for a short time. There is also anxiety over the future of Treaty and Truth Telling in the aftermath of the voice referendum and closing the gap between Indigenous and non-Indigenous peoples as the LNP have walked away from Treaty talks. Island residents are concerned about water levels getting lower on the island as well as a lack of transparency on how Native Title is handled. But we can find this balance without the racist dog whistle baiting the LNP always lay bare!
And then there’s Amanda Stoker, a former QLD Senator (2018-2022) and Morrison Assistant Minister (2020-2022) who is one of the most right-wing conservatives to contest the area in living memory for the seat of Oodgeroo, making a political comeback. Stoker is contesting the seat after long term conservative Mark Robinson announced his retirement with only a short stint as Deputy Speaker during the Newman era (2012-2015).
Stoker has a track record of the following controversial policies:
Opposing tobacco plain packaging; supporting the tobacco industry
Supports the repeal of section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act
Supports the nuclear energy industry in Australia
Blames unions for the casualization of workplaces
Opposes the minimum wage and penalty rates
Opposes LGBTIQ rights
Opposes Abortions
Opposes voluntary euthanasia.
If Stoker gets in there is a fair chance she’ll become a senior state government minister or even a potential Attorney–General given she was the Assistant Attorney-General in the Morrison Government and her high profile on Sky News. But her controversial conservative right-wing policy stances may come to haunt her long term as the electorate wants moderate approaches. Especially as the aging demographic is replaced by younger generations reaching voting age and younger families moving into the area.
The Oodgeroo and Bowman areas have always had MPs regardless of their party colors who have been flexible enough to delegate sensitive constituent matters. If Stoker takes on a ministerial role this could isolate some in the community, especially if she’s in a government that slashes and cuts essential services (in the event Crisafulli hasn’t learnt from the Newman era (2012-2015) which became a deeply unpopular government after just one term in power.
If Stoker and Crisafulli don’t learn, and Labor don’t become more organized around their candidates a third option may become an inevitable choice in 2028 and 2032 either with the Greens or another candidate like Claire Richardson in the 2020 race. The local area hasn’t had a senior MP in a senior role since both Paul Clauson and John Goleby held roles in Joh Bjelke–Petersen’s National government as Redlands MPs during the 1980s and Con Sciacca in Bowman as in the Hawke/Keating Labor government in the 1980s–1990s. Locals are pretty used to having easy access to their MP and having that flexibility. An MP with ministerial gatekeepers might put many in the community offside.
There are also the issues of the current election:
Cost of living crisis
Housing and rental crisis
The environment
Public Transport
Olympics 2032
Crime and Youth Justice
Health
Despite some of the good Labor is doing to mitigate the cost-of-living crisis; with 50 cent fares on public transport, the cheaper car registration, or energy bill supplements. It might not be enough to turn the tide as the LNP are polling well enough to win back the Treasury benches. The QLD Greens have a good chance to win back seats like McConnell Greenslopes, and Cooper, but the ALP is hemorrhaging in regional areas and the outer suburbs to the LNP. There is also a possibility of the KAP and PHON also doing well in regionally QLD as well. Where the LNP is capitalizing on the economy being weak under Labor. As the saying goes “It’s the economy stupid!”.
There is a good chance that Labor could also lose the seats of Redlands, Capalaba, and even Lytton if it’s not careful. Lytton lost its local Labor Cr in Sara Whitmee during the 2024 Brisbane City Council election. Labor lost a seat it held for 72 years on a 12.5% swing with Alex Givney (LNP) winning there giving an extra LNP seat to the Schrinner LNP BCC led administration. And Teal Independent Adelia Berridge lost her seat to an LNP-aligned candidate in 2024’s local council races where Labor has failed to win back the once strong area of Division 7 which Murray Elliott held for 23 years since losing it to the LNP since 2020.
The safe seat of Capalaba has been Labor for over 40 years except for Steve Davies (LNP) during the Newman era including Lytton during both the Newman and Joh eras, and when Bill Lamond (Country/National) secured the seat in 1974 for a term until 1977 and Neil Symes in the Newman era. Despite it being solidly Labor for 74 years, the working class vote usually swings towards populists that usually resonate with them even if it works against their own self-interest. Especially when they believe they’re not being listened to either! Case in point, Trumpism in the United States and Brexit in the UK. In Redlands it’s a bellwether seat and traditionally swings towards whatever party wins government on a strong swing apart from several instances of Labor in minority government during the early Beattie and Palaszczuk eras. The area that covers Redlands has been National/LNP for 29 years since 1969 and held by Labor for 26 years.
Me campaigning for FREE car parking at Redlands Hospital in September 2023
What’s clear is that voters locally are concerned about the mishandling of the Olympics in 2032 during a cost-of-living crisis. Similar to the Gabba and Raymond Park issues voters are concerned about the Birkdale White Water rafting facility proposed by the LNP bloc in Redland City Council on sensitive heritage listed land. Voters in my area are also concerned about having to pay for fees for car parking for patients and staff at Redlands Hospital causing congestion (which was originally FREE) as well as slow response times for ambulances. Voters are extremely concerned about the future direction of QLD Health no matter which party wins the QLD state election!
LNP Oodgeroo and Capalaba candidate core flutes for Stoker and Fields at Alexandra Hills
Youth Crime?
Another issue unfortunately that the LNP is capitalizing on is the youth crime and justice issue. The LNP are running strong on a policy for adult time for adult crimes similar to how the new NT CLP Finocchario government reducing the criminal age to 10 (which, unsurprisingly, has civil liberty, human rights, youth groups, and experts concerned). As most evidence indicates, the best way to reduce youth crime is prevention through programs investing in sports, arts, and music programs that interest young people and deal with the causes and not the symptoms of the issue. The LNP are running Paul Field as the LNP Capalaba candidate who lost his family to a hit and run incident from a repeat youth offender, where Don Brown MP said that the media was handling the issue as a “media beat up”. Was Don Brown insensitive on this topic? Or does he have a point? Statistical evidence points to youth crime not being as unusual as to what is has always been in recent decades, the issue is its more publicized in the media via the 24/7 news cycle and social media. The LNP does also run the risk of running a candidate passionate about a singular issue with little scope for wide issues that may affect Capalaba beyond the state election. If Field wins, it would be difficult to sustain electorally given Labor’s history here but its not impossible!
My Professional Advice to all Pollies
IF the LNP do win don’t get too comfortable; 24 hours is a long time and anything can change quickly! Despite Campbell Newman’s huge victory in 2012 I bet he didn’t think he’d only be there for one term with Labor being in power for nine years. Don’t take voters for mugs! After two election campaigns as a candidate now since 2020 and assisting on countless elections on all tiers since 2012 I’ve seen a thing or two. Voters want to be heard; they’re sick of people self-serving and not helping them with the issues that matter most to them! LESS RORTS MORE ACTION! Find long-term solutions to complex problems without just finding it as a cheap way to win votes in the short-term! There is no such thing as seats anymore!
Mathematically there are stats that back up the likelihood of better chances for major parties still but don’t take voters for granted; you can still lose your seat over time, even if you hold a “safe seat”. 3rd party options are on the rise! Accept loss and move on! Learn from it! It’s time for less sledging and more robust policy discussions. People hate how personal it has become; it makes most people in politics look like tools and wankers!
We need to be more genuinely honest and spin less or no disinformation. Social media has really made politics become the wild west which could harm the mental health of all of those involved regardless of their political beliefs or affiliations. As my Latvian pop always used to say: NO BULLSHIT! Or voters will punish you for it! In a 24/7 media cycle and more access to information it’s easier for voters to judge our pollies nowadays so be on notice at all times! You serve the public, not the opposite! Be open-minded and less partisan, hold your convictions but willing to be pragmatic. This is arguably why the public responded so well to former leaders like John Howard and Bob Hawke’s approaches to government – love them or hate them. And people like Don Chipp and Bob Brown cut through in the former Democrats “Keeping the Bastards Honest!” and the Greens carrying on the mantle as the third electoral force. In some ways Climate 200 advocating a similar mantra, but time will see if they all maintain this success and messaging. One thing is true though; despite your politics everybody wants more honest pollies and a system that works to provide for them a better tomorrow and planet.
Callen Sorensen Karklis currently is the 2024 QLD State candidate for Oodgeroo. He holds a Bachelor of Government and International Relations from Griffith University and Business Diploma from QLD TAFE. He currently studies a Cert 4 in Youth Work. He has worked in retail, media advertising and government roles. He has also been involved with Bayside Crime Stoppers in 2015 – 2016 and was on the Griffith Student Representative Council as the Indigenous Officer during the Pandemic in 2021. He also has been a cohost on 4ZZZ radio programs on Workers Power and Indigi Briz. He was also a coordinator for Jos Mitchell’s Leading Change Team during the 2024 Redland City Council elections.
Like what we do at The AIMN?
You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.
Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!
Your contribution to help with the running costs of this site will be gratefully accepted.
You can donate through PayPal or credit card via the button below, or donate via bank transfer: BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969
I stirred from a deep sleep at around 2.30pm last night. Like millions of people around the world I am deeply disturbed about the slaughter of innocents in Gaza.
I grabbed the notebook I keep next to my bed. My starting point? Knowing all that I do about moral disengagement I asked myself what would I write about what is being done to the people of Gaza if I was completely morally disengaged. What steps would be taken to ensure success?
What I scribbled in capital letters is that people want to live in a safe world. And they certainly want governments that actually serve and care for people. That they want governments that listen and are morally engaged.
Then I went back to sleep.
When I got up this morning I started writing typing in earnest. Carefully interpreting my scribbled notes. I’m a left-handed spider writer.
Theeight steps
The cold logical and deeply disturbing facts are this:
Innocents get killed in all wars.
In large scale targeted bombings, large numbers of innocents will be killed. They will be labelled ‘collateral damage’.
The killing of innocents in such bombings will increase in proportion to the explosive power of each bomb used.
The killing of innocents in such bombings will be maximised by increasing population density of the ‘enemy’.
Such killings will be further increased by the design of the bombs being used. For example, through the use of bunker busting bombs on urban areas.
In shear logical terms all of the above would be known and taken into account in all aspects of military planning.
To do all of the above requires dehumanisation of the ‘enemy’ regardless of whether they are actual combatants or not. Success is highly dependent on personnel abandoning all sense of moral agency.
Crucial to the success of the preceding steps is the dismantling of Gazan society. This means destroying all social infrastructure. Health, education, social welfare, food production and distribution, along with all economic infrastructure.
The lesson
The historical and contemporary lesson? The greater the degree of distance between victims and participants in genocide the more successful the implementation of the eight steps.
The terminator hypothesis
The power of technology provides the moral disengagement (detachment as it were), to carry out the eight steps.
This, I contend, is the highway to hell and oblivion and, moreover, it is blatantly the case that money is no object.
Millions of people have seen the movie The Terminator. With advances of technology – surveillance and targeting technologies, artificial intelligence and drones – we are a heartbeat away from removing the human element from the perpetration of inhumanities.
The dire impact of that on societies, economies, communities, individuals, government and civilisation today and into the future cannot be underestimated.
The driver of this is normalised and deep moral disengagement.
The question ourselves and our governments need to ask.
Is that the world we want ourselves and those who come after us to live in?
Reality
As I emphasised at the beginning people want governments that actually serve and care for people. That they want governments that listen and are morally engaged.
That’s the positive change that’s needed. And, even in Australia, we are living and seeing the opposite in far too many respects.
Like what we do at The AIMN?
You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.
Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!
Your contribution to help with the running costs of this site will be gratefully accepted.
You can donate through PayPal or credit card via the button below, or donate via bank transfer: BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969
The normalisation and globalisation of moral disengagement
Earlier this year I createdThe Moral Disengagement Handbook. The handbook focusses on the Australian Government and the Australian Public Service.
Why did I focus on them? Because over the past decade Australians have lived through and witnessed an appalling decline in the behaviour and practices of politicians along with that of the government agencies whose decisions and actions effect the lives of every single Australian.
In 2023 people are very attuned to the fact that all is not well with politics and government. The trouble is that the major parties are not really listening to them. Let alone acknowledging that the problem is them – behaviours and practice – and its systemic.
The persistent sentiments that runs through people’s disquiet is that politicians and government will never change, they are out of touch, they don’t care about people, and they don’t listen. Numerous real-life examples have created and reinforced that sentiment.
These sentiments have not changed with the election of the Albanese Government. If anything those sentiments are stronger than ever. Hence, for example, the rise and rise of the Teal independents.
It may be argued that the Albanese Government inherited the situations that have given rise to these sentiments. While there is no doubt that the extremes of the Morrison Government (along with those of previous LNP Governments), plunged the decline in behaviours and practices to new depths that does not absolve the Albanese Government of responsibility.
Why do I say that? Because … As I pointed out in the handbook:
“Tragically, within the Australian Government the moral compasses of public servants and politicians have been switched off and, indeed, are expected to be switched off. As a result, great harm is done to people, society and the land we live on. To all of our institutions and democracy itself.
Here we are in 2023 and, even with the election of the Albanese Government, we see a government that is fearful of dealing with the fact that moral disengagement has been normalised in government and, to varying degrees, all of our institutions.”
Here we are in December 2023 and what are seeing from the Albanese Government just over halfway through its term of office? A continuing failure to directly address the moral disengagement that has been normalised in government and its institutions. The statement I made in the handbook still holds true today. Moreso.
“Despite the fact that Professor Bandura’s work offers practical solutions to deal with the problem the Albanese Government and the Australian Public Service persists with a tried and failed focus – Culture change and leadership. Over decades millions of dollars has been wasted on culture change programmes and leadership development in the Australian Public Service. They have failed dismally. It is the wrong solution for what is the actual problem – the normalisation of moral disengagement.
2023. The Albanese Government and the Australian Public Service continues to waste taxpayers’ money on tried, failed and wrong approaches despite the very real threats moral disengagement poses to the lives and future of the Australian people. To the health of the public service, government, society and democracy.”
The situation is even more urgent due to the dire need to ensure the behaviours, practices, policies and actions of government actually ensure the well-being of people, households and the community in the face of:
Social inequality
Climate change and catastrophe
The continuing destructive impacts of the policies and actions of the Morrison Government
Homelessness
The loss of opportunity to younger generations now and into the future
The severe distortion of our economy courtesy of the military industrial complex
The continuing demise of democracy
Especially our participation in the war and genocide being inflicted on the Palestinian people.
What we are seeing within individual Western nations, is a slide into a 21st century dark age driven by the normalisation of moral disengagement.
The war and genocide being sponsored and inflicted on the Palestinian people by those nations is clear indication of the globalisation of moral disengagement in action.
If the governments of Western nations dealt with moral disengagement from within would they be participating in the globalisation of moral disengagement? Would they be sponsoring, directly enabling and sanitising the industrial scale slaughter of the Palestinian people?
Would they be going down the path of a Dark Age Within. A Dark Age Without?
And what can we all do, individually and together, to put a stop to the moral disengagement that is driving this comprehensive descent into darkness?
Restoring Moral Engagement in the Australian Government – Ending the silence that feeds bad government and harms people
We all know it. We all feel its the impact. Government is a big, complicated beast. Politicians seemingly never change. Many have lost sight of their real reason for being there – that is to represent their constituents and govern for all Australians.
The only time, it seems, they are interested in us is when elections come around and then many do whatever it takes to persuade us to vote for them. Increasingly, these persuasive tactics have taken on a dark and sinister form with the Liberal party now deploying Trumpian lies, and propaganda imported from the USA to scare and confuse people halting any progress to better future – think the No campaign.
Then there is the Australian Public Service. From the outside, they seem to blindly follow orders and are more concerned about protecting their own careers and political masters than serving the people. If people dare to complain they get stuck on a bureaucratic treadmill.
It’s always the same. The majority of politicians and bureaucrats at the top are in it for themselves. Despite all the money government has (our money), and all the technology it’s got worse.
The treatment of whistle blowers such as David McBride and Richard Boyle and The Royal Commission into Misconduct in the Banking, Superannuation and Financial Services Industry illustrate how bad things have got.
The Robodebt Royal Commission showed us all just how bad things are inside ‘the system’. People died.
Time after time the media ‘reports’ on the goings on in the Australian Government and the Australian Public Service. However are we really getting the true picture? For several years now the mainstream Australian media have not been pulling their weight when it comes to delivering independent journalism.
The major commercial media outlets and, sadly, the ABC have lost their moral compass resorting to presenting False Balance Reporting often spruiking lies and propaganda in the form of news. And it’s very obvious the Murdoch media is running a protection racket for Liberal Party and their vested interests. When the Fourth Estate has fallen prey to vested interests we know that democracy is in trouble.
The persecution of whistleblowers, the stifling freedom of information, rampant secrecy, the win at all costs misuse of the legal system along with rampant spin and denial. The Australian Government has it all. To this day.
No wonder things are a mess, and no wonder most public servants quickly learn to shut up. The threshold for being seen as a troublemaker is nigh on paranoid.
We could go on and on. Despite the good work of many, many good people an awful lot of ‘bad’ things continue to happen. The real question is what drives all the bad things. The answer is the insidious normalisation of moral disengagement. That’s the conversation The Australian Government is afraid to have.
We can have that conversation and, at the same time, hold politicians to account in a very specific way that cuts through all the clutter and denials.
Let’s gets down to it.
What is the status of the work on moral disengagement? Where did in come from?
Professor Albert Bandura (1925 – 2021).Albert “Al” Bandura, the David Starr Jordan Professor of Social Science in Psychology, Emeritus, in theSchool of Humanities and SciencesInternationally recognised as the most influential psychologist of the twentieth century.
For his extraordinary contributions Professor Bandura was presented with the National Medal of Science at the White House by President Obama on May 19, 2016.
Without Albert Bandura the understanding of the importance of social learning, social modelling, observational learning and how people come to accept and repeat behaviours would be a shadow of what it is today.
Fast track to 2016. The publication of Albert Bandura’s book “Moral disengagement: How people do harm and live with themselves” is a powerful legacy. A practical tool to empower people in Australia and elsewhere to remove and prevent moral disengagement. To restore the health of government, all our institutions and our democracy.
“… people in all walks of life behave harmfully and still maintain positive self-regard and live in peace with themselves. They do so by disengaging moral self-sanctions from their harmful practices. These psychosocial mechanisms of moral disengagement operate at both the individual and social system levels” (Albert Bandura).
The research that underpins moral disengagement is work renowned and rock solid. The specific mechanisms of moral disengagement identified by Professor Bandura are of immense practical use.
Using the mechanisms of moral disengagement?
As Professor Bandura states the “… mechanisms of moral disengagement operate at both the individual and social system levels”. The Australian Government, the Parliament, political parties and the Australian Public Service are intense social systems.
The mechanisms can be used to judge and provide feedback on the behaviours and practices of politicians and officials within government (individual level).
The mechanisms also provide a reliable means of identifying the behaviours and practices that drive every harmful, corrupt, abusive, inhuman statement, decision, policy, process or action imaginable (social system level).
Consequently, we can all use the mechanisms to judge the moral health of the Australian Government in a precise and cohesive way. This is important as it prevents politicians and official from portraying complaints as isolated instances.
The mechanisms of moral disengagement
Advantageous comparison
Making something appear better or less harmful than it is by pointing to something far worse.
Attribution of blame
Blaming the victims or targets that have been harmed by immoral behaviours and practices for bringing it on themselves.
Dehumanization
Portraying people who will be harmed by behaviours and practices as less than human. As case numbers in a system or process.
Diffusion of responsibility
Minimising personal responsibility for any harm caused to people by claiming they are only responsible for a small part of the process.
Displacement of responsibility
Superficially acknowledging the harm caused to people by behaviours and practices, while claiming it’s the result of decisions made at a higher level.
Disregard, distortion, and denial of consequences
Ignoring, minimising and denying the harm (including evidence of harm), caused to people.
Euphemistic language
Using sanitised language and jargon to mask the hurt and harm caused to people.
Moral justification
Claiming behaviours and practices that cause harm to people serve a higher social and moral purpose.
Tips
Start by briefly describing the issue you are concerned about. Is it an individual or system level issue? Or both.
Is your issue about:
A particular public service agency
A number of public service agencies
The Australian Public Service as a whole
A government minister
A particular policy or programme
A particular administrative process
The behaviours and practices of public servants
The behaviours and practices of politicians
The management of staff within a public service agency
Highlight the mechanisms of moral disengagement you have experienced or observed.
It is likely that you have experienced or observed a large number of or all of the mechanisms/behaviours. Consider the intensity with which you have experienced them.
If you have experienced one or very few of the mechanisms/behaviours also consider the intensity with which you have experienced them.
End by pointing out the harm being done, and deaths being caused.
Steve Davies is a retired public servant. His expertise is in the areas of organisational research and people development. He’s always been attracted to forward looking work. He’s a vocal critic of destructive, cruel and backwards looking behaviours and practices.
Over the years he’s spoken in depth with whistleblowers and advocated the use of technology (including social media tech) to empower people to do great things together.
His thinking and work have been heavily influenced by such great thinkers and researchers as Shoshana Zuboff, Albert Bandura and Peter Senge for decades.
Like what we do at The AIMN?
You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.
Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!
Your contribution to help with the running costs of this site will be gratefully accepted.
You can donate through PayPal or credit card via the button below, or donate via bank transfer: BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969
Moral disengagement is a huge problem in the Australian Government and its public service. To this day major political parties remain silent on this issue. Labor, Liberal and the Greens are all silent despite the facts and the science.
Moral disengagement is the process by which individuals or groups distance themselves from their own moral standards, allowing them to engage in behaviour that they would otherwise find unacceptable.
The phenomenon of moral disengagement fuels corrupting and abusive behaviours and practices in government. It causes harm to individuals and society as a whole. It is a serious issue that demands attention and action.
Understanding Moral Disengagement
Moral disengagement is a psychological and social mechanism that allows individuals to justify unethical behaviour without feeling guilty or responsible for the consequences of their actions. It is enables people to engage in harmful behaviours without feeling any sense of responsibility.
There are several mechanisms of moral disengagement. For example, using euphemistic language to describe actions, making them seem less harmful than they actually are. Using displacement of responsibility, blaming others for their actions rather than taking responsibility themselves. Minimising the harm caused by actions, arguing that the benefits outweigh the costs.
Moral Disengagement in Government
When moral disengagement becomes the norm, especially among people with power and status, it infects entire institutions.
In Australia media report after media report, enquiry after enquiry showed how morally disengaged the Morrison Government was.
Robodebt, the behaviour towards women within the parliament, conflicts of interest, the abuse of whistleblowers and throwing millions of dollars at consultancy companies. The list goes on and on.
Moral disengagement has been normalised in the Australian Government and its public service. It does not magically go away with the election of a new government.
Open public conversation and government transparency are key steps towards eradicating moral disengagement.
The Impact on Policy
We must act decisively to put a stop to the dangerous practice of normalising moral disengagement in the Australian government. Steps need to be taken to help people to recognise and confront situations where individuals and political factions detach themselves from the moral consequences of their choices and conduct.
By actively screening moral disengagement from all policies and processes, we can ensure that ethical considerations are baked into government.
Imagine the potential of a morally engaged government with a populace of good individuals who do not turn a blind eye to wrongdoing. The key to unlocking this potential lies in breaking the silence and removing harmful practices. It’s time for good people to take a stand and make their voices heard.
The Human Cost
Moral disengagement can have devastating consequences for individuals, their families, public servants and wider society. Australia’s Royal Commission into the Robodebt Scheme graphically illustrated that in forensic detail.
Robodebt was a scheme that automatically assessed and raised debts against welfare recipients. The data was wrong yet the government proceeded.
This inflicted misery on welfare recipients and resulted in deaths. All inflicted on and industrial scale.
The silence maintained by most public servants and the blind obedience of senior officials are reminiscent of historical atrocities. This behavioural similarity is striking and shouldn’t be taken lightly.
The Royal Commission’s findings displayed the truth that moral disengagement was deeply normalised in the Australian Government. Alarming as it is, the current government has not taken any initiative to address this deeply ingrained concern.
The Challenge
Normalised moral disengagement has severe implications for the community’s wellbeing and the health of government and its public service.
The behavioural mechanisms and practices of moral disengagement are learned and normalised. This perpetuates belief that change is impossible.
Australians have seen and experienced the harm caused by moral disengagement in their government’s policies, behaviours and practices.
It is easily costing the Australian community billions of dollars.
It is essential to take action to eliminate moral disengagement and prevent any future normalisation in government and its public service.
Judging Moral Disengagement
The 8 mechanisms of moral disengagement are a powerful lens for judging behaviours and practices of government. The mechanisms are:
Advantageous comparison
Attribution of blame
Dehumanisation
Diffusion of responsibility
Displacement of responsibility
Disregard, distortion, and denial of harm
Euphemistic language
Moral justification
The mechanisms are the behaviours and practices used to stigmatise, distort, deny and mask harmful and abusive behaviours and practices. They are endemic in the Australian Government.
Resources
I suggest people view these videos in this order:
Professor Albert Bandura (1925-2021).
Moral disengagement – “an informed public can actually neutralise a lot of this stuff.
Dr. Peter Senge
“… bureaucracy development to the extent it is dehumanised… so in many ways we’ve worked to drive out the empathy, the intuition, the artistry.”
Professor Shoshana Zuboff “Wonderland. Herding people. Behaviour modification. The age of conquest.”
Steve Davies is a retired public servant. His expertise is in the areas of organisational research and people development. He’s always been attracted to forward looking work. He’s a vocal critic of destructive, cruel and backwards looking behaviours and practices.
Over the years he’s spoken in depth with whistleblowers and advocated the use of technology (including social media tech) to empower people to do great things together.
His thinking and work have been heavily influenced by such great thinkers and researchers as Shoshana Zuboff, Albert Bandura and Peter Senge for decades.
Like what we do at The AIMN?
You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.
Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!
Your contribution to help with the running costs of this site will be gratefully accepted.
You can donate through PayPal or credit card via the button below, or donate via bank transfer: BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969
2023: What have we all been seeing for a long time? Media report after media report, enquiry after enquiry all showing how inhumane and corrupting the Morrison Government was.
Everything from Robodebt, the behaviour towards women within the parliament, conflicts of interest, the abusive treatment of whistleblowers through to throwing millions of dollars at consultancy companies. The list goes on and on.
People are rightly saying that this is all due to the unhealthy culture of politics and government itself. Some media reports say the same and, again rightly, add that it’s the system.
Australian Public Service ‘experts’ and senior officials say that culture change is needed. Then they say, culture change is hard. This sounds plausible and right.
However, they are wrong. They have been banging on about culture forever. It’s a failed model. One that consultancy firms make a lot of money out of.
As for the public in general and the causalities and victims of this culture? They are rightly demanding real and lasting change. They want answers to the question of what drives all this abuse and disempowerment. They want to know why there is so much silence and denial from government.
It is as clear as day that people need practical tools for understanding, empowerment, and action. The same applies to people within government and Australian Public service agencies. The great explain away of culture has achieved nothing.
A more precise people friendly approach and tool is needed. A tool and approach that connects people and enables them to cohesively call out the inhumane and corrupting behaviours and practices of politicians, public servants, and organisations.
A tool and approach that enables them to call out inhumane and corrupting laws, policies, procedures, and actions in a powerful way.
Such an approach and tool exists, but has been (and is), ignored by the Australian Government (including the Albanese Government), Australian Public Service and law makers. Why?
I can answer that courtesy of deep personal professional experience – decades of research, conversations, and a few battle scars. They ignore it because careers and old bureaucratic empires (sacred cows), will fall and laws and policies will have to be changed when looked at through the lens of the mechanisms of moral disengagement.
Instead, they have displaced responsibility for healthy behaviour and practices within all of our institutions to “the culture industry”.
We are all living through the cruel results of that. And it is no use thinking that the moral disengagement that government is riddled with will disappear simply because we have a newly minted Australian Government.
Introducing…
World renowned Professor Albert Bandura may no longer be with us, but his work lives on. Next year the twelfth international conference of indigenous and cultural psychology will be held in Yogyakarter, Indonesia.
That conference will commemorate the centenary of his contribution to science.
His research into ‘real life’ individual and collective behaviours and practices provides a clarity and tool for understanding that are needed more than ever.
One of the fondest wishes he had for his work on moral disengagement was that it would be used by people to prevent harm and restore, as it were, the health of organisations. Empowering people.
Before continuing to read you might like to find out more on the official websiteAlbert Bandura.
It is, I believe, a national disgrace that the Australian Government is allowing the behaviours and practices that have enabled moral disengagement to continue to be a feature of politics and public administration.
What can we all do?
Look at the behaviour, practices and policies of the government and the Australian Public Service. What you have experienced personally. What you know from others. What you have seen in the media.
Look at what you have experienced or are concerned about through each one of the mechanisms. The more indications you see the worse the situation is.
Mechanisms of moral disengagement
Indicators
Advantageous comparison
“It would be worse with”. It would be worse if …”
Attribution of blame
They brought it (harm) on themselves. They didn’t navigate the system properly. They didn’t tell us.
Dehumanization
Treating people as not quite one of us. As a liability. A threat to the system. As cogs in a process.
Diffusion of responsibility
“It’s the system. It’s the process. I’m only responsible for”
Displacement of responsibility
“I’m following orders. I have no choice”.
Disregard, distortion, and denial of harm
Hierarchy fragments responsibility for harm. Robodebt was an attempt to further minimise human responsibility.
Euphemistic language
The use of sanitised language to mask hurt and harm. Officialese or bureaucratese
Moral justification
Moral, social and economic. *Also, bureaucratic and technological. Data driven.
What actions could you take next?
Talk with your family, friends and colleagues. If you are a member of a trade union or professional body talk with them.
Write to or talk with your member of parliament. If they don’t respond you’ll know they are part of the problem.
Share and start conversations on social media. I suggest you tweet at your local member of parliament, a Minister or Prime Minister. Please use one or more of the hashtags below:
The sooner we all start looking at the behaviour and practices of government and the public service through a common lens the better. Why? Doing so will give us all a more powerful voice.
I’m often asked how we got into this mess? The patterns of history are important.
The early twenty first century was a time of optimism about the future. About a world of promise.
It was no surprise that Australians dismissed the Howard Government in 2007 and elected the Rudd Government.
Early in its term the Rudd Government faced the global financial crisis. They demonstrated a speed, creativity and achievement that was praised around the world.
The Rudd Government also set a leading example with Open Government, Freedom of information, public engagement, and its efforts to reform public administration, the Australian Public Service
The intent of these initiatives was reflected in the title of the reform report – Ahead of the Game. The aim was to give Australia the best public service in the world. Innovation, openness, data, enhanced democracy, and Gov 2.0 was being championed.
A Gov 2.0 movement had started prior to the election of the Rudd Government. That movement was highly valued by members of the government. The enthusiasm was immense. The work and approach of the Gov 2.0 Taskforce was world leading.
However, there was also tension courtesy of ‘the old guard’ of the Australian Public Service. There were cultural battle lines within and across public service agencies.
During the tenure of the Julia Gillard Government the declaration of open government was released. In many ways that declaration highlighted the cultural and political battle lines.
Please read theDeclaration of Open Government media release and share the declaration.
These were times of great promise. However, the changes were fragile flowers.
Why were the promises and changes made to achieve greater openness, transparency, and public engagement (often referred to as enhanced democracy), so fragile?
Because these flowers of change were young and its roots shallow. In contrast, the dark culture of power, control and authoritarianism ran deep. That culture persisted due to the Howard Government giving Australian Public Service agency heads their fiefdoms.
The actions of the Howard Government resulted in strong shift towards blind compliance to Ministers and, with that, the corrosion of the of the notion of whole of government and its public service serving the Australian people.
It was unsurprising that with the demise of Rudd and then Gillard Labor Government those promises, and progress were snuffed out.
Thinking about the travesty of Robodebt years later. The behaviours, practices and environment that enabled Robodebt were set by the Howard Government years ago.
The trajectory of decline was, therefore, set by the Howard Government.
The election of the Abbott Government in 2013 saw an aggressive return to the Howard years. The use of data and technology to enhance democracy, fairness, and decency? Forget it. Open Government? Closed.
Freedom of information? Reduced to a shadow of its former self. The Freedom of Information Commission and the Information Commissioner, Professor John McMillan, were treated appallingly.
Behaviours and practices to ensure silence and blind compliance were normalised. Aggressive authoritarianism on a whole of government scale was the order of the day. The Abbott Government grew unpopular in a short period time.
Such was the concern that Malcolm Turnbull mounted a leadership challenge against Tony Abbott. 30 consecutive Newspolls had shown the government was headed for defeat.
Ultimately, Turnbull took the Liberals to the 2016 election. The result? A one seat Liberal majority.
However, due to his having ‘only’ narrowly saved the Liberal Government the radical neo-liberals saw an opportunity to oust Turnbull. Morrison was installed as leader and the authoritarian neo-liberal agenda ramped up.
Even darker times lay ahead
In so many ways the behaviours and practices of the Morrison government were the end point in a long and cruel journey. Parallels with the Trump administration and that of the Johnson Government in the United Kingdom abound.
Like you, I could go on and on about the policies and conduct of the Morrison Government. However, there is no point. Why? The mainstream media and social media have reported extensively on what we have all witnessed and experienced.
What the mainstream media have not done is explain why we are in such a dire situation. What drives the behaviours and practices. Some media outlets are blinded by ideological bias. Others lack the knowledge and skills.
The single most damning and powerful accounts were the real-life cruelty, corrupting behaviours and practices exposed by the Royal Commission into the Robodebt Scheme.
The real-life stories and experiences were an evidentiary illustration of the extent and normalisation of moral disengagement. Arguably, Australia had a government of ‘Moral Disengagers’.
The Morrison Government took Australia to a 21st Century version of a Dark Age.
On 2 June 2023 I drafted advice and guidance that I was going to send to the Prime Minister and other politicians. The advice was for members of parliament to set an example by discussing moral disengagement openly in the House and the Senate.
Why? One of the reasons why moral disengagement thrives and grows is that the mechanisms that drive it (behaviours and practices), are rendered undiscussable.
I decided to sit on that advice to see how the Albanese Government would progress. That was a fair enough call on my part. Besides, as I stated at the start of this document:
“As for the public in general and the causalities and victims of this ‘culture’ they are rightly demanding real and lasting change. They want answers to the question of what drives all this abuse and disempowerment. They want to know why there is so much silence and denial from government”.
The fact is that moral disengagement has been normalised in government (politics), and the Australian Public Service. Its widespread and granular, corrupts everything and causes long lived harm to individuals, communities and our society.
Are the actions of the Albanese Government sufficient to deal with the prevalence of moral disengagement in our institutions? NO.
Is the Australian Public Service willing or capable of eradicating moral disengagement? NO.
Should the National Anti-Corruption Commission be publicly using the mechanisms of moral disengagement as a tool to proactively prevent corrupt and corrupting behaviours and practices? YES.
Do we need to do so to provide great government that actually serves people? YES.
Steve Davies is a retired public servant. His expertise is in the areas of organisational research and people development. He’s always been attracted to forward looking work. He’s a vocal critic of destructive, cruel and backwards looking behaviours and practices.
Over the years he’s spoken in depth with whistleblowers and advocated the use of technology (including social media tech) to empower people to do great things together.
His thinking and work have been heavily influenced by such great thinkers and researchers as Shoshana Zuboff, Albert Bandura and Peter Senge for decades.
Like what we do at The AIMN?
You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.
Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!
Your contribution to help with the running costs of this site will be greatly appreciated.
You can donate through PayPal or credit card via the button below, or donate via bank transfer: BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969
Why it matters: During the 2022 elections the Labor Partypromised to createa National Integrity Commission and reform public sector whistle blower laws.
Despite those promises the newly elected Labor Governmentis allowing the prosecutionagainst Australian Taxation Office whistle blower, Mr Richard Boyle, to continue.
They are doing so using the very laws (Public Interest Disclosure Act), they vowed to reform. This is illogical. Worse still, it is driven by the moral the disengagement that has infected government and causes great harm. All funded with our taxes.
Look deeper: For decades Australia’s Federal Government had no whistle blower laws. Major political parties saw no need for it. Neither did the Australian Public Service.
The ultra-conservative Liberal Government of Tony Abbott was elected later that year. The Liberals remained in power until 2022. They hollowed out open government and freedom of information. The creation of a positive culture of public interest disclosures (whistle blowing), was snuffed out at birth.
Labor’s Attorney General, Mark Dreyfus,recently dropped the prosecution of lawyer Bernard Colleary for allegedly releasing classified information about alleged spying operations in East Timer.
In contrast,he is refusing to drop charges againstTax Office whistle blower Richard Boyle. Mr Boyle’s alleged crime? Blowing the whistle on unethical debt recovery practices in the Australian Taxation Office.
Mr Boyle has been subjected to hostile treatment since 2016 when he first raised issues within the Taxation Office concerning the aggressive and unethical use ofgarnishee powersagainst small business owners.
The typical pattern is that when public servants such as Mr Boyle raise serious issues, they are heavily managed and documented. As they pursue matters through due process, they experience more hostility. This gets worse when matters enter the legal battlefield.
The problem: Government agencies own the rigged whistle blowing battlefield from the start. Whistle blowers, at even a low level, are in a shooting gallery. All paid for by taxpayers.
The big questions: Why is the newly elected Labor Government choosing to go down a path that contradicts its election promises?
Why do otherwise good politicians and officials sanction behaviours and practices that cause harm to people and corrupt government organisations?
“The Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions (CDPP) takes decisions about the commencement of prosecutions independently of government,” … and the Attorney-General’s powers under section 71 were “reserved for very unusual and exceptional circumstances.”
The content of those two statements made by the Attorney General raises questions concerning the specific (and insidious), mechanisms of *moral disengagement:
The CDPP making decisions independently of government seems logical. However, in practice it is enabling the “diffusion of responsibility”.
However, follow up reviews found that Mr Boyle’sallegations were validand ATO investigations into his disclosures superficial. This shows that the situation is anything but usual.
In the light of the Labor Government’s election promises the Attorney General’s decision makes no sense. On that basis alone legal action against all whistle blowers should cease. It’s time for government to reflect deeply on the mechanisms of moral disengagement.
Taking action: What’s missing in all of this is a lens through which to understand and judge the behaviours, practices and actions of politicians and public servants. Such a lens is needed to keep government, our society and lives healthy.
The Morrison Government and COVOD-19 are tragic and dramatic proof that we all need a lens to help us cut thorough the politics, spin, denials and deception.
Moral disengagement was mentioned earlier. That term and the two mechanisms mentioned come from the lifelong work of the world-renownedProfessor Albert Bandura(1925 – 2021).
His work spans two centuries and his book Moral Disengagement – How People Do Harm and Live with Themselves pulls together a lifetime of research, learning and teaching.
The mechanisms of moral disengagement provide a powerful lens for us to use to assess and judge the behaviours, practices and actions of politician public servants.
They provide a means to help us all judge the policies and services they provide to us. The very direction they seek to take our nation.
More than that using the mechanisms of moral disengagement provides a common foundation that we can use to talks and judge together.
At the moment the stories of the public, public servants and whistle blowers are isolated, untold and rarely listened to. They can be ignored, twisted or picked off one by one.
We all know there is a lot wrong. Politicians and public servants? They are all trapped in systems and institutions that are infected with moral disengagement.
Too many are a part of the problem. Too many forget that silence means consent.
Now that the noisy political campaigning is officially over we all have time to think and reflect. Over the past few weeks we have all been bombarded by candidates and the media alike. The next few days gives us all time to think and reflect.
For many people this election is far more important than most. It is the election that will determine our future, the shape of our society and, indeed, our very existence. The impact of Covid-19, climate change the state of the real economy and so much more tells us that.
The purpose of this guide is not to preach to you about how you should vote. Its purpose is to provide you with a thoughtful and proven lens, a set of glasses, through which to judge the behaviours, actions, policies and beliefs of current politicians and political parties.
Such a guide is necessary since this election will determine the future of ourselves and generations to come. All at a time when the world as we know it has been upended.
The need for this guide is also crucial due to the behaviours, actions (not forgetting failures to act), policies and beliefs of the Morrison Government. That course was set by the Abbott Government in 2013 and, despite attempts at moderation, persisted with the Turnbull Government.
Courtesy of serendipity my good friends at Reclaim the News released a movie on 18 May 2022 that perfectly shows the serial nature of the destructive behaviours, actions, policies and beliefs of the Morrison Government.
Before continuing, please spend four and a half minutes viewing:
You’ve viewed the movie, now for a little more context.
While any organisation, including governments, can become dysfunctional Australia certainly cannot afford to continue with a government that has serially displayed its toxicity and, worse still, thinks it is normal.
Which leads us to the question of what drives the toxic behaviours of the Morrison Government?
The answer? Moral disengagement.
Moral disengagement – Background
This quick guide is based on the lifelong work of Professor Albert Bandura (1925-2021).
Professor Bandura is regarded as the fourth most influential psychologist of the twentieth century. He was awarded The President’s National Medal of Science (President Obama).
He is known as the originator of social learning theory. His (2015) book, Moral Disengagement: How People Do Harm and Live with Themselves, provides us with a powerful lens through which to judge the behaviours of the Morrison Government and, for that matter, any organisation.
There is a dire need for such a lens in these deeply troubled time as it helps us cut through government and media propaganda and spin. Not to mention its use of behavioural insights data to nudge and manipulate us.
Professor Bandura’s work on moral disengagement is crucial to understanding how otherwise good people do bad things in organisations. Of how organisations become toxic and destructive.
The prevalence and persistence of moral disengagement within organisations tells us how normalised it has become institutionally. In turn, that tells us how unhealthy that organisation is.
Depending on the size, status and role of an organisation it also gives us an indication of spread of moral disengagement. So, for example, where moral disengagement is normalised within a government it will spread to public service agencies.
That is exactly what has been taking place across the Australian Government. Think robodebt, the persecution of whistleblowers, abuse of legal power and more.
Let me share a useful analogy with you. The behaviours characteristic of moral disengagement spread like a virus. Where those behaviours take hold, they shape and corrupt everything. They are normalised. That’s what the Morrison Government has done.
Moral disengagement – Your guide
The most practical way to think of moral disengagement is the process by which organisations and individuals suspend morality and behave in ways that cause harm to people and society.
People, government, like us to think that that is something that only happens in dictatorships. That is not the case.
Where moral disengagement is normalised and institutionalised the result is toxicity and dysfunction that harms people and the society we live in.
That’s exactly what we have been seeing and experiencing with the Morrison Government. Too many good people within government have shut up about this issue.
The video produced by my good friends at very clearly shows the extent of the problem.
If you didn’t view it earlier, please do so now.
Each and every instance shared in that video ticks every box in terms of moral disengagement. Looked at collectively and the only conclusion is that we are in dire straits. To think that the Morrison Government is going to somehow heal itself makes no sense.
Below are listed the element of moral disengagement. Look at any behaviours, practices, actions, inactions or policies of the Morrison Government and see what you think.
Beneath each of the mechanism I have provided some short pointers to assist you.
Discuss what you think with friends, family members, colleagues and contacts.
Do the same with any incoming government. We all need to be vigilant to fix this mess.
Thank you for taking the time to read all of this. Now it’s over to the mechanism of moral disengagement and your judgments:
Moral, social and economic justification
It’s the right thing to do. It will help them. It’s cost effective
Euphemistic language
Burying harms being done to people in the clinical, dehumanising and legalistic language of bureaucracy rather taking responsibility.
Advantageous comparison
Describing harmful acts or processes as the lesser of two evils
Displacement of responsibility
I’m just following orders.
Diffusion of responsibility
It’s ‘just’ the process. Everyone must follow it.
Disregard, distortion and denial of harm.
Disregard of harms caused. Victimisation of persons who expose harms and wrongdoing.
People who raise issues others do not want openly discussed are ruthless attacked. Think of the Grace Tames of this world along with, for example, whistleblowers such as Richard Boyle, David McBride, Bernard Collaery and Citizen K. In fact, think of anyone who speaks out.
Dehumanisation
Denying the humanness of a person or group. Enables victimisation.
Like what we do at The AIMN?
You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.
Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!
Your contribution to help with the running costs of this site will be gratefully accepted.
You can donate through PayPal or credit card via the button below, or donate via bank transfer: BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969
We begin the countdown to our Top 5 most viewed articles in 2021. Number 5 goes to Steve Davies for this article from February 2020, which narrowly missed out last year coming in at Number 6.
Hardly a week goes by on Twitter where I don’t seen this article being tweeted and its popularity continues to grow.
Pentecostalism – The decline, infiltration and fall of Australian Democracy
There is a strong sentiment that there’s something not right with the Morrison Government. There is also a sentiment something is not right with Prime Minister Morrison’s leadership.
These sentiments and concerns have gradually increased since Morrison’s “miracle” election win in 2019. Broadly speaking, that increase is due to the aggressive and arrogant manner in which this government has pursued its agenda.
As important as they are, set aside the many policy issues for the moment and you are left scratching your head. What is driving this government to behave so aggressively and arrogantly after an election win?
All of these questions, sentiments, views and concerns have increased further due to the reactions of this Prime Minister and that of his government to Australia’s bushfire disasters and its ongoing denial of the global climate crisis.
There have been recurring questions and reports in both the mainstream media and social media concerning Morrison’s religion – Pentecostalism. Some of these reports highlight the secrecy of the Pentacostalism.
“ … it is also a characteristic of Pentecostalism itself. Little more than a century old, this highly distinctive expression of Christianity has flourished in the spiritual marketplace by selling a feel-good message to seekers while keeping the full truth for trusted true believers.”
However, there is actually quite a lot of information that lifts the veil on the nature of Pentecostalism. In particular, the ideas and strategies that drive its ‘influence’ in the world of politics and government.
The conclusion I have come to is that serious questions need to be asked of the Prime Minister and his government.
We, the people, need to demand transparency from government on these issues. Religious influence is one thing. Dominance another.
The conversation that we must have
It is well known that the Christian Right seeks to shape government and society. The question is to what extent is the Australian Government is in the grip of dominionism and Pentecostalism? Arguably you can see this influence in this government’s stance on climate change, social welfare, employment policies, religious freedom and education.
Morrison has made no secret of his religious beliefs and affiliations – Pentacostalism. In addition, there have been questions about the influence of his religion in the press, social media and the wider community. Questions about his religious beliefs and affiliations have been further amplified by his response, as Prime Minister, to the bushfires that have ravaged Australia since September 2019.
What I am writing here is not an attack on the religious freedom of politicians as private citizens. The information I am presenting concerns dominionist strategies associated with the Pentecostalist movement and Christian Right. Strategies intended to shape and dominate governments and societies.
The strategies in question are known as the Seven Mountains Mandate. The Seven mountains mandate has a long history. It is a dominionist strategy for transforming nations and with the Gospel of Jesus Christ.
The advocates of this strategy have taken to using the term sphere’s of influence rather than mountains. They are doing so to soften the language. Why? To slide under the radar. To minimise resistance.
The marketing and communication is very clever. However, at the end of it the agenda is the same. To conquer the seven mountains to transform nations in the image of a particular brand of Christianity.
These strategies and their underpinnings raise serious questions concerning the infiltration of Australia’s system of government – the policies it sets and, indeed, its behaviour. Seeking to influence is one thing, seeking to dominate another.
The ideology of dominionism remains a divisive issue within the broader the fundamentalist movement itself. It has been reported that attempts have been made to recast dominionism as a benign influence (to soften the language), in order to deceive people. There is more detailed information in this Church Watch Central article; Is your church part of Houston’s NARpostolic Australian ‘Christian Churches’ (ACC) network?
Church Watch is essentially a religious research group:
“Founded by pastors, elders and members from various denominations around Australia (now with pastoral contributors from around the world), CWC investigates and publishes news on controversies, reports on scandals, resources on discernment and tools to identify cults and sects.”
They state:
“We wish to be factual as we can on Church Watch Central. If there is any information on ChurchWatch Central that you think is not accurate, please contact us at c3churchwatch@hotmail.com. All constructive criticism will be appreciated.”
There has always been tension over the separation of church and state in Australia. In view of the activities of what is broadly coated the Christian Right and the dominionist ideology we need to revisit that issue in 2020 with a particular focus on the degree of infiltration and the influence of the Seven Mountains Mandate on government policy making.
Decline
Between 2010 and 2018 public trust in Australia’s democracy, its institutions and leaders has more than halved. Research undertaken by the Museum of Australian Democracy predicts that:
“By 2025 if nothing is done and current trends continue, fewer than 10 per cent of Australians will trust their politicians and political institutions — resulting in ineffective and illegitimate government, and declining social and economic wellbeing”.
The decline in trust was sparked by conflicts within the Rudd Government. Those conflicts became public and resulted in the removal of the Prime Minister Kevin Rudd and the installation of Julia Gillard as Prime Minister.
The Liberal Party under Tony Abbott exploited those divisions to win office in 2013. The tactics used by the Liberal Party to gain power emboldened them to aggressively pursue a policy agenda that did not match the promises it made during the election. That resulted in a further decline in public trust.
Due to the falling popularity of the government Tony Abbott was removed from the Prime Ministership. He was replaced by Malcolm Turnbull. Prime Minister Turnbull attempted to shift and soften policy directions. Contrary to expectations within the Liberal Party Turnbull barely won the election. Hence, the seeds of conflict festered and grew within the Turnbull Government.
Conflicts between the extreme right and moderate wings of the Liberal Party resulted in two leadership spills. The eventual result of these leadership spills was the installation of Scott Morrison as Prime Minister on 18 August 2018. Scott Morrison called an election for May 2019 and won with a wafer thin majority.
The Morrison Government has continued with a policy agenda driven by its extreme right. Public disquiet with its policies and approach has grown. The Morrison Government’s weak approach to climate change, coupled with its reaction to the bushfires that have devastated large areas of Australia and have outraged Australians and the world.
Public trust is still at an all time low. The tipping point alluded to by the Museum of Australian Democracy in its December 2018 report Trust and Democracy in Australia remains.
Indeed, we are arguably past the tipping point due to the arrogance shown by the Morrison Government since the last election. An arrogance underlined by the horrific impacts of the bushfires, the government’s refusal to accept the science of climate change and listen to the public.
The community and media are scratching their heads over the reaction of the Prime Minister and his Government to climate change and the bushfires. This is on top of disquiet over policies as diverse as those associated with financial institutions, Newstart, Aged Care, health and more. Increasingly the sentiment is that we do not have a normal government.
There are also deep concerns over the behaviour of government politicians and, to this day, concerns about the influence of Pentecostalism within the Morrison Government. Concerns about dominionism and the Seven Mountains mandate have been raised some media reports.
“They say when the United States sneezes, the rest of the world catches a cold. And so it is with dominionism. Now an international movement, dominionism is thriving in Australia.
From local parents and citizens associations to regional councils, from our previously secular state schools to state government departments and even within Parliament House, Canberra, this particular clique of evangelical Christian extremists is working quietly but assiduously to tear down the division between church and state, subvert secularism and reclaim this nation for Jesus.
But, is there sufficient evidence to suggest that the Australian Christian Lobby (ACL) is at the forefront of this ideological holy war? In order to achieve their aim, dominionists plan to infiltrate, influence and eventually take over seven key spheres of society: business, government (including the military and the law), media, arts and entertainment, education, the family and religion.”
The Seven Mountains Mandate is essentially a Christian Right strategy of political and cultural infiltration and conquest.
The mandate has a long history and is also a means of unifying and growing the Christian Right. Some say, of dominating Christianity itself. The Christian right and neo-conservative politics increasingly work hand in glove. The mandate is a strategic theocratic weapon.
The convergence of interests between the Christian Right and neo-conservatives was reflected in the election of Donald Trump and, indeed, in the election of Scott Morrison.
“The parallels between Donald Trump’s unexpected triumph and Scott Morrison’s “miracle” election win are remarkable. A week on, it’s increasingly apparent this was a Trump-like victory.”
This convergence is so strong that after Scott Morrison’s election victory:
“Some of Australia’s most extreme Christian-right parties have withdrawn from politics, claiming the election of Prime Minister Scott Morrison had rendered them redundant.”
“Dominionism, like the Christian Right itself, has come a long way from obscure beginnings. What is remarkable today is that the nature of this driving ideology of the Christian Right remains obscure to most of society, most of the time. Dominionism’s proponents and their allies know it takes time to infuse their ideas into the constituencies most likely to be receptive. They also know it is likely—and rightly—to alarm many others.
It is time to ring the alarm bells over the influence of dominionism in Australia and the very real threat it poses to our system of government, democracy and society.
Fall
In a very real sense Australian democracy has already fallen. Public trust in our institutions has collapsed. We have a government that simply does not listen.
We have a government under the influence of a religious ideology that advocates the establishment of a theocracy. Capturing the Government Mountain through “Archangels” is one of the keys to that.
We have a government whose behaviour and actions suggest that it has adopted the strategies and intent of the Seven Mountain Mandate. One indication of that is the Religious Freedom Bill.
One thing is certainly clear in all of this. This government needs to come clean on the influence of this religious ideology on its behaviour, policies and actions.
I will be writing more about these matters in the very near future.
Like what we do at The AIMN?
You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.
Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!
Your contribution to help with the running costs of this site will be gratefully accepted.
You can donate through PayPal or credit card via the button below, or donate via bank transfer: BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969
2020 had it all as far as articles on The AIMN, but it was the incompetence and distrust of the prime minister and his government that stirred the senses, dominating our Top 5 list.
There was one exception, as you will soon see.
But to cut to the chase, here are The AIMN’s five most popular posts in 2020:
(The Top 5 is based on the number of views only. It does not take into account the number of comments or the post’s popularity with other online media sites such as Facebook or Twitter).
Grumpy came from nowhere to grab top spot – with the help of tens of thousands of Americans who Grumpy’s bite and humour appealed to. Not since Roswell’s Dear America, please don’t make Donald Trump your president in January 2016 has an article on The AIMN attracted so much interest from beyond our borders. If you haven’t read Grumpy’s post then you’re in for a New Year’s treat.
The opening sentences set the scene for a few good belly laughs.
Excerpt:
No grace, no dignity, no humility, no magnanimity, no class, no morals, no empathy, no soul.
He has no friends, not even a dog.
His wife can’t bear his touch, his daughter can’t avoid it.
Devoid of humour he doesn’t make jokes, he doesn’t laugh. Not ever. An occasional dismal rictus, a necrotic gash in his ochre-lacquered face-bladder signifies nothing more than his satisfaction in transacting another con.
He’s a loathsome coagulation of every human failing with no compensating virtues.
Rossleigh can say “I woz robbed!” Holding top spot from mid-January until mid-December he would have felt quite comfortable that he’d take the crown, but he’ll have to take the issue up with Grumpy Geezer.
Rossleigh’s article proved one thing: don’t judge an article by its title. If so, you could miss out on a satirical masterpiece.
Excerpt:
Morrison had a natural advantage in that he was boring even before he was made Treasurer. Once he was made leader after Dutton’s aborted coup, Morrison managed to keep people in their semi-hypnotic state throughout the election campaign by talking about such things as curries and a fair go. Somehow he managed to have various people think that they were back in the fifties and it was a bonza country, but he was just a little bit alternative because he embraced these curry things, while Jen could whip up a mean salad…
All of which brings me to the apology…
Given his total and absolute inability to demonstrate empathy or competence in any job he’d ever held, and his ascent has only been through bastardry and nastiness, why on earth would we expect any better once he became our PM. Really, it’s our fault for electing him to a position far beyond his capabilities. He’s possibly doing the best that he can.
And so, on behalf of the Australian people, I’d just like to say, “Sorry, Scottie. We’ve expected far too much of you.”
This article was essentially a re-post of a Bill Shorten media release (LABOR’S NATIONAL FIRE FIGHTING FLEET) just days prior to the 2019 federal election. Compared to Prime Minister Scott Morrison’s incompetence in handling the bushfires that raged in January, one was left with a feeling of “if only”.
Excerpt:
Who said there’s no difference between Labor and the LNP? I thank Henry Johnston for pointing me to this media release by Bill Shorten (on 17 March, 2019) which provides us with one glaring difference. Read on, and be the judge:
A Shorten Labor Government will boost Australia’s firefighting capabilities with a national fleet of aircraft and dedicated smokejumper units to keep Australians safe from bushfires.
All Australians understand the devastating impact that bushfires have. Lives are lost, homes destroyed and communities shattered.
Our firefighters and emergency services personnel are among the best in the world, and they do a tremendous job, often putting their own lives at risk. But they need more support from government.
Kaye Lee – as only she can do – called out Scott Morrison’s “bullshit” about bushfire management. It’s a short article, but it has plenty of sting.
Excerpt:
In May 2016, when Scott Morrison was Treasurer, the National Aerial Firefighting Centre called for a “national large air-tanker” fleet to confront a growing bushfire threat. Despite a Senate inquiry backing the proposal, the government rejected it in September 2017, “noting that bushfire responsibility is a matter for each state and territory.”
Are firetrucks or planes to come to a screeching halt at the border? Do we ignore another state’s need to keep our resources in case we need them?
Smoko has defended his decision not to meet with former fire chiefs last year, who were also calling for more aerial firefighting capability, saying he chooses to listen to those ‘in their jobs now’.
Then up pops NSW Rural Fire Service Commissioner Shane Fitzsimmons who says the federal government has sat on a business case for a boosted national aerial firefighting fleet for at least 18 months.
John showed as the value of asking questions and digging for answers.
Excerpt:
A couple of days ago I received this message from a Facebook friend:
“Hi John, Part of the bloated Dutton budget is spent on this group [AIDR]. Young Peter has been strangely silent of late so may be an appropriate time to highlight his expertise.”
The Australian Institute for Disaster Resilience (AIDR) develops, maintains and shares knowledge and learning to support a disaster resilient Australia.
So why haven’t we heard about this institute before or during the course of this ongoing disaster? What is the reason for its existence, and why does it come under the umbrella of Peter Dutton’s department?
What is their total funding and what is it spent on? With a bit of checking I find out that it is funded by the by the Attorneys General’s Department
And a big special mention must also to every author who published articles on The AIMN in 2020. Anyone of those could have been, and deserved to be, in the Top 5.
Like what we do at The AIMN?
You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.
Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!
Your contribution to help with the running costs of this site will be gratefully accepted.
You can donate through PayPal or credit card via the button below, or donate via bank transfer: BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969
“The time is well overdue for serious parliamentary and public discussion of the morality of the actions and behaviour of the Scott Morrison Government. In particular its impact on people, the integrity of government and the Australian Public Service.
It is impossible to consider whether actions, decisions and behaviour are moral without considering moral evil.
The key aspects of the actions, decisions and behaviour I have listed in this piece are markers of moral evil.
To varying degrees both major political parties have brought us to this point. It is critical that we have this difficult conversation given the capacity of technology to amplify moral evil and cause great harm to individuals, our society and our democracy” (Steve Davies).
Part 1 – Evil
Social media and the mainstream media are littered with reports concerning the behaviour and policies of the Coalition Government. This has been the case since the election of the Abbott Government in 2013. Community concern ran so deep and was so vocal that within two years Tony Abbott was removed as leader.
He was replaced with the more politically correct and amicable Malcolm Turnbull. It was anticipated that a Turnbull would ensure electoral victory. It did not quite work out that way.
“Malcolm Turnbull’s audacious double dissolution gamble looked to have backfired spectacularly on Saturday night as voters walked away from the first-term Coalition government in droves, raising the chances of another hung parliament and turmoil in Coalition ranks.” (Australian federal election 2016:Voters walk away from Malcolm Turnbull, results on knife’s edge. Sydney Morning Herald, 3 July 2016).
The rest, as they say, is history. In what has been characterised as a coup Scott Morrison replaced Malcom Turnbull as leader and the Coalition and was returned to government in the 2019 federal election.
In short order the Morrison Government returned to the radical neo-liberal policies and autocratic behaviour that were the hallmark of the Abbott Government.
Unsurprisingly, it did not take long for severe community concern to re-emerge over the behaviour of the Morrison Government and the impact of its policies.
Fast track to today and what we are seeing with the Morrison Government is the continued:
implementation of policies, practices and technologies that demonise and abuse welfare recipients and disadvantaged Australians.
implementation of policies and practices that increase social and economic inequality.
abuse, via administrative and legal means, of whistle-blowers whose information exposes government corruption.
abuse, via administrative and legal means, of citizens and taxpayers whose information exposes wrongdoing and maladministration.
demands for blind compliance within government agencies at the expense of ethical and moral conduct.
failure to implement a National Integrity Commission to ensure the ethical conduct of politics and public administration.
development and operation of oversight mechanisms that render redress, justice, fairness and transparency impossible for ordinary citizens.
weaponisation of technology and data which robs citizens and officials of moral agency and freedom of rights.
stifling and distorting the public dialogue essential to democracy and good government via propaganda and censorship.
trauma and psychological harm inflicted on people and damage caused to society through the normalisation of moral disengagement across government. The treatment of refugees is a graphic illustration of this.
It suits the Morrison government and its apologists to look at the actions I have listed though the lens of individual ‘cases’. That tactic falls apart since the actions listed are systemic and touch the lives of every Australian.
The deeper significance of these actions is that they are markers of the normalisation of moral evil within the Morrison Government.
Pointedly, the question of the impact of moral evil has been raised by people of faith in relation to a new evil: the COVID-19 pandemic:
“But potentially deadly viruses, like other natural disasters, can also be greatly exacerbated by the moral evil of bad human decisions and actions. For example, human beings can cause or contribute to pandemics by irresponsible actions like the following: wet markets (animal meat placed in highly unsanitary conditions), risky or negligent laboratory practices, biological warfare, government unpreparedness, failure to share critical medical technology, etc. Natural evil in the world never seems to stand alone. Moral evil often makes things much worse.” (Coronavirus Pandemic & the Problem of Evilby Kenneth R. Samples, April 21, 2020).
Definition of moral evil: Moral evil is the result of any morally negative event caused by the intentional action or inaction of an agent such as a person or organisation
What accrues from all of this that we should all question the behaviour and actions of the Morrison Government, or for that matter and other governments, through the lens of moral evil. It’s also logical and prudent that we do so considering the espoused values and beliefs of the Prime Minister and some of his colleagues.
It may very well be that the Prime Minister and his colleagues assert that their beliefs are their business. However, it is particularly important we do question them due to the impact of government on our society, democracy, and lives.
After all, how do we judge whether actions and decisions are morally good without considering moral evil? In many ways, this is illustrated by the Morrison Government’s behaviour in relation to COVID-19.
One only has to look at the constant sniping of the Morrison Government against the actions of the Victorian Government. In particular, against the Premier of Victoria Dan Andrews see this.
Throughout the Morrison Government have railed against the recent lock down in Victoria. The tension behind this appears to be the Morrison Government’s preference for what they call a “scalable proportional response,” snapping back and ‘living with’ COVID-19.
As reported in the Sydney Morning Herald on 28 March 2020:
“A group of experts convened by the Group of Eight prestige Australian universities at the request of Chief Medical Officer Brendan Murphy a fortnight ago were asked to give the government their view of the severity of social distancing measures that should be adopted. The overwhelming majority in the group urged a strategy of “go now, go hard and go smart.”
But “go now, go hard” did not find favour in Canberra. As Deputy Chief Medical Officer Paul Kelly later explained, what was at issue was “essentially two schools of thought”. One was go hard, go fast, while the other was what he called a “scalable proportional response.” (Has Australia’s coronavirus response been too slow off the mark?Sydney Morning Herald, 28 March 2020).
The difference in the two approaches was highlighted by Bill Bowtell AO, Adjunct Professor UNSW Strategic Health Policy Consultant especially related to global health and development, HIV/Aids prevention and public health in a tweet on 28 October 2020.
Re-opening of Melbourne only possible because of great determination of Victorian people and setting of strategic goal of zero local transmissions by @DanielAndrewsMP Imperative this goal remains into 2021. The best way to live with #covid19 is to live without it. Well done!
Bill’s statement; “The best way to live with #covid19 is to live without it” sums up the moral evil inherent in Morrison Government sniping and position. That is, the so-called scalable and proportional response sews the seeds of illness and death and, with that, social and economic decline.
One only has to look at the success of our neighbours in New Zealand to see that and, of course, of the success of the people of Victoria.
Coming soon:
Part 2 – Demons
Part 3 – Demagogues
Steve Davies is a retired public servant. His expertise is in the areas of organisational research and people development. He’s always been attracted to forward looking work. He’s a vocal critic of destructive, cruel and backwards looking behaviours and practices.
Over the years he’s spoken in depth with whistleblowers and advocated the use of technology (including social media tech) to empower people to do great things together.
His thinking and work have been heavily influenced by such great thinkers and researchers as Shoshana Zuboff, Albert Bandura and Peter Senge for decades.
Like what we do at The AIMN?
You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.
Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!
Your contribution to help with the running costs of this site will be gratefully accepted.
You can donate through PayPal or credit card via the button below, or donate via bank transfer: BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969
Scratching your head over the behaviour of the Scott Morrison government since its miracle election win? Wondering about the extent of the influence of Pentecostalism and extreme right Christianity over politicians, our institutions and society? Concerned about what sort of world and society is being created around us and future generations?
It’s time to cut through the smoke, mirrors and spin. To strip away the veils.
The Extreme World Makeover is a very telling part of the Seven Mountain Mandate. These sermons are marketed as training courses. In reality they are propaganda tools that provide guidance to the “Sons, daughters” and Archangels of Pentecostalism in order to dominate societies.
“No the whole deal is, again, he has told satan I am going to do this great thing with my sons and daughters. They are going to awake; they are going to arise, and they will begin to shine. And they will operate in my light in my authority and my power and they will change everything. I will not have to exert my own direct muscle. They will carry my muscle. They will cr*sh you.” (Source: Extreme Makeover Sermon).
The zeal with which the Morrison Government is pursuing its agenda and the agenda the government itself, are a reflection of the Extreme World Makeover.
For too long people have made light of Pentecostalism. For example, by dismissing them as a bunch of babblers who believe they will be beamed up to heaven while the rest of us burn.
The reality is different:
“He is seated at the right hand of the father until all his enemies, all Jesus’s enemies, have to be under our feet. He is the head, we are the body, he’s not coming back until that happens.” (Source: Extreme Makeover Sermon).
Translation: The mission of the Pentecostal elite is to stamp the institutions (Mountains), of our society with their ideology and dominate those who do not believe as they do. When they achieve that Jesus will apparently return.
Strip away the religious rationale and content and what is being foisted on Australian society and our democracy by our own government makes foreign interference look like a tea party.
The devil in the detail
Extreme World Makeover is the ninth session of a Seven Mountain Mandate course given by Johnny Enlow (senior pastor and leading Seven Mountains Mandate activist).
In my view it is more accurate to refer to these sessions as sermons. His sermon was uploaded to YouTube on 6 March 2019.
The work of Enlow and others is based on the ideology of dominionism. Evangelicals, including Pentecostals who subscribe to that ideology believe that Christians should shape societies and nations bytaking control of key institutions (Seven Mountains).
“Dominionism is the theocratic idea that regardless of theological camp, means, or timetable, God has called conservative Christians to exercise dominion over society by taking control of political and cultural institutions.”
In his book,The Seven Mountain Prophesy, Enlow describes seven mountains that shape societies and nations. The mountains (sometimes referred to as spheres), are family, religion, education, media, entertainment, business and government.
The Seven Mountains Mandate is a Christian Right strategy of political and cultural infiltration and conquest.
The Mandate has a long history and is also a means of unifying and growing the Christian Right. Some say, of dominating Christianity itself. The Christian right and neo-conservative politics increasingly work hand in glove. The Mandate is a propaganda weapon.
The convergence of interests between the Christian Right and neo-conservatives wasreflected in the electionof Donald Trump and, indeed, that of Scott Morrison.
“The parallels between Donald Trump’s unexpected triumph and Scott Morrison’s “miracle” election win are remarkable. A week on, it’s increasingly apparent this was a Trump-like victory.”
“Some of Australia’s most extreme Christian-right parties have withdrawn from politics, claiming the election of Prime Minister Scott Morrison had rendered them redundant.”
Scott Morrison has made no secret of his religious affiliations. He attends Horizon Church (formerly Shirelive) – a Pentecostal Christian church affiliated with Australian Christian Churches and the Australian branch of the Assemblies of God denomination.
Furthermore, it is public knowledge that Brian Houston, founder and senior pastor at Hillsong Church, is Scott Morrison’s mentor. Research undertaken by Church Watch Central draws a direct line of sight between Brian Houston, dominionism and the Seven Mountains Mandatevia information from Alphacrucis College.
“In researching the Australian Christian Churches, we came across a PDF put out by the New Apostolic Reformation (NAR) education hub and Hillsong’s epicentre of indoctrination – ‘Alphacrucis College’.”
Both thePDF documentandthe articleby Church Watch Central lists Hillsong’s churches. As is Horizon church (under its former name ShireLive).
The Alphacrucis document also states:
“Since 1948 the College has been training men and women for effective Christian ministry. This continues to be a strong emphasis of AC and is being enhanced by the college offering education and training for the broader marketplace. AC’s mission is to equip Christian leaders to influence all spheres of society, including business, education, politics, media, and arts and entertainment.”
Church Watch also points out that:
“They are claiming to be Pentecostal but then subtly push their dominion mandate and blatantly push New Apostolic Reformation heresy like the Seven Mountain Mandate.”
The history is quite convoluted, but in essence, what Church Watch are saying is that the Pentecostal Church itself has been infiltrated by dominionists via the Seven Mountains Mandate strategy. Religion is one of the Mountains and the objective is to capture the peak of that mountain.
The critical question that accrues from all of this is to what extent are the views, policies and actions of the Scott Morrison government are being influenced by the New Apostolic Reformation, Seven Mountains Mandate propaganda and dominionist ideology.
What is certain in all of this is that this government has a case to answer, the parliament needs to hold them to account and the people of Australia have a right to answers.
The Extreme World Makeover sermon of Johnny Enlow
And just like in the television ads of years gone by, there’s more. You, dear reader, be the judge.
This particular sermon is the ninth in a series and in many ways is the most telling. It runs for over an hour. I decided to transcribe the first 12 and a half minutes of the sermon as this is where Enlow sets the scene in order to frame the mission.
I also transcribed the last 10 minutes as it is a call to action that frames the mission and the role of believers and leaders. To motivate the army.
The intervening 48 minutes essentially provides religious interpretations to construct a world view for audiences. To take them on a journey that ultimately leads them to their mission and assignment.
My intent in taking this approach is to make it easier for you, the reader. The proponents of dominionism have been very good at clouding information in religion in order to garner support and infiltrate institutions.
Setting the scene
Before reading this transcript you may prefer to first view the part of the sermon that sets the scene. I have highlighted key points in the transcript.
The agenda described via the Seven Mountains Mandate is clear. Fortunately, those who advocate Seven Mountains Mandate document themselves well. They’ve hidden themselves in plain sight behind the veil of a variety of church brands and, I might add, clever marketing.
The Seven Mountains course (or as I call them, ‘sermons’) provide critical insight into the mindset, strategies and infiltration tactics being used to achieve dominion over us and our democracy.
The actions and behaviour of the Morrison Government reveal its commitment to subjecting Australia to an extreme makeover. To theocratise our institutions. All of this is happening in Australia without our consent and without any public dialogue. The threat to our society and democracy is clear.
In all of this it is important to note that, the same as in the United States, there is common ground between neo-conservatives and the Pentecostal movement and that this agenda, this extreme makeover, is global and Australia would be a prized trophy.
Pentecostalism – The decline, infiltration and fall of Australian Democracy
There is a strong sentiment that there’s something not right with the Morrison Government. There is also a sentiment something is not right with Prime Minister Morrison’s leadership.
These sentiments and concerns have gradually increased since Morrison’s “miracle” election win in 2019. Broadly speaking, that increase is due to the aggressive and arrogant manner in which this government has pursued its agenda.
As important as they are, set aside the many policy issues for the moment and you are left scratching your head. What is driving this government to behave so aggressively and arrogantly after an election win?
All of these questions, sentiments, views and concerns have increased further due to the reactions of this Prime Minister and that of his government to Australia’s bushfire disasters and its ongoing denial of the global climate crisis.
There have been recurring questions and reports in both the mainstream media and social media concerning Morrison’s religion – Pentecostalism. Some of these reportshighlight the secrecyof the Pentacostalism.
“ … it is also a characteristic of Pentecostalism itself. Little more than a century old, this highly distinctive expression of Christianity has flourished in the spiritual marketplace by selling a feel-good message to seekers while keeping the full truth for trusted true believers.”
However, there is actually quite a lot of information that lifts the veil on the nature of Pentecostalism. In particular, the ideas and strategies that drive its ‘influence’ in the world of politics and government.
The conclusion I have come to is that serious questions need to be asked of the Prime Minister and his government.
We, the people, need to demand transparency from government on these issues. Religious influence is one thing. Dominance another.
The conversation that we must have
It is well known that the Christian Right seeks to shape government and society. The question is to what extent is the Australian Government is in the grip of dominionism and Pentecostalism? Arguably you can see this influence in this government’s stance on climate change, social welfare, employment policies, religious freedom and education.
Morrison has made no secret of his religious beliefs and affiliations – Pentacostalism. In addition, there have been questions about the influence of his religion in the press, social media and the wider community. Questions about his religious beliefs and affiliations have been further amplified by his response, as Prime Minister, to the bushfires that have ravaged Australia since September 2019.
What I am writing here is not an attack on the religious freedom of politicians as private citizens. The information I am presenting concerns dominionist strategies associated with the Pentecostalist movement and Christian Right. Strategies intended to shape and dominate governments and societies.
The strategies in question are known as the Seven Mountains Mandate. The Seven mountains mandate has a long history. It is a dominionist strategy for transforming nations and with the Gospel of Jesus Christ.
The advocates of this strategy have taken to using the term sphere’s of influence rather than mountains. They are doing so to soften the language. Why? To slide under the radar. To minimise resistance.
The marketing and communication is very clever. However, at the end of it the agenda is the same. To conquer the seven mountains to transform nations in the image of a particular brand of Christianity.
These strategies and their underpinnings raise serious questions concerning the infiltration of Australia’s system of government – the policies it sets and, indeed, its behaviour. Seeking to influence is one thing, seeking to dominate another.
The ideology of dominionism remains a divisive issue within the broader the fundamentalist movement itself. It has been reported that attempts have been made to recast dominionism as a benign influence (to soften the language), in order to deceive people. There is more detailed information in this Church Watch Central article;Is your church part of Houston’s NARpostolic Australian ‘Christian Churches’ (ACC) network?
Church Watch is essentially a religious research group:
“Founded by pastors, elders and members from various denominations around Australia (now with pastoral contributors from around the world), CWC investigates and publishes news on controversies, reports on scandals, resources on discernment and tools to identify cults and sects.”
They state:
“We wish to be factual as we can on Church Watch Central. If there is any information on ChurchWatch Central that you think is not accurate, please contact us at c3churchwatch@hotmail.com. All constructive criticism will be appreciated.”
There has always been tension over the separation of church and state in Australia. In view of the activities of what is broadly coated the Christian Right and the dominionist ideology we need to revisit that issue in 2020 with a particular focus on the degree of infiltration and the influence of the Seven Mountains Mandate on government policy making.
Decline
Between 2010 and 2018 public trust in Australia’s democracy, its institutions and leaders has more than halved. Research undertaken by the Museum of Australian Democracypredictsthat:
“By 2025 if nothing is done and current trends continue, fewer than 10 per cent of Australians will trust their politicians and political institutions – resulting in ineffective and illegitimate government, and declining social and economic wellbeing”.
The decline in trust was sparked by conflicts within the Rudd Government. Those conflicts became public and resulted in the removal of the Prime Minister Kevin Rudd and the installation of Julia Gillard as Prime Minister.
The Liberal Party under Tony Abbott exploited those divisions to win office in 2013. The tactics used by the Liberal Party to gain power emboldened them to aggressively pursue a policy agenda that did not match the promises it made during the election. That resulted in a further decline in public trust.
Due to the falling popularity of the government Tony Abbott was removed from the Prime Ministership. He was replaced by Malcolm Turnbull. Prime Minister Turnbull attempted to shift and soften policy directions. Contrary to expectations within the Liberal Party Turnbull barely won the election. Hence, the seeds of conflict festered and grew within the Turnbull Government.
Conflicts between the extreme right and moderate wings of the Liberal Party resulted in two leadership spills. The eventual result of these leadership spills was the installation of Scott Morrison as Prime Minister on 18 August 2018. Scott Morrison called an election for May 2019 and won with a wafer thin majority.
The Morrison Government has continued with a policy agenda driven by its extreme right. Public disquiet with its policies and approach has grown. The Morrison Government’s weak approach to climate change, coupled with its reaction to the bushfires that have devastated large areas of Australia and have outraged Australians and the world.
Public trust is still at an all time low. The tipping point alluded to by the Museum of Australian Democracy in its December 2018 reportTrust and Democracy in Australiaremains.
Indeed, we are arguably past the tipping point due to the arrogance shown by the Morrison Government since the last election. An arrogance underlined by the horrific impacts of the bushfires, the government’s refusal to accept the science of climate change and listen to the public.
The community and media are scratching their heads over the reaction of the Prime Minister and his Government to climate change and the bushfires. This is on top of disquiet over policies as diverse as those associated with financial institutions, Newstart, Aged Care, health and more. Increasingly the sentiment is that we do not have a normal government.
There are also deep concerns over the behaviour of government politicians and, to this day, concerns about the influence of Pentecostalism within the Morrison Government. Concerns about dominionism and the Seven Mountains mandate have been raised some media reports.
“They say when the United States sneezes, the rest of the world catches a cold. And so it is with dominionism. Now an international movement, dominionism is thriving in Australia.
From local parents and citizens associations to regional councils, from our previously secular state schools to state government departments and even within Parliament House, Canberra, this particular clique of evangelical Christian extremists is working quietly but assiduously to tear down the division between church and state, subvert secularism and reclaim this nation for Jesus.
But, is there sufficient evidence to suggest that the Australian Christian Lobby (ACL) is at the forefront of this ideological holy war? In order to achieve their aim, dominionists plan to infiltrate, influence and eventually take over seven key spheres of society: business, government (including the military and the law), media, arts and entertainment, education, the family and religion.”
The Seven Mountains Mandate is essentially a Christian Right strategy of political and cultural infiltration and conquest.
The mandate has a long history and is also a means of unifying and growing the Christian Right. Some say, of dominating Christianity itself. The Christian right and neo-conservative politics increasingly work hand in glove. The mandate is a strategic theocratic weapon.
The convergence of interests between the Christian Right and neo-conservatives wasreflected in the election of Donald Trumpand, indeed, in the election of Scott Morrison.
“The parallels between Donald Trump’s unexpected triumph and Scott Morrison’s “miracle” election win are remarkable. A week on, it’s increasingly apparent this was a Trump-like victory.”
This convergence isso strongthat after Scott Morrison’s election victory:
“Some of Australia’s most extreme Christian-right parties have withdrawn from politics, claiming the election of Prime Minister Scott Morrison had rendered them redundant.”
“Dominionism, like the Christian Right itself, has come a long way from obscure beginnings. What is remarkable today is that the nature of this driving ideology of the Christian Right remains obscure to most of society, most of the time. Dominionism’s proponents and their allies know it takes time to infuse their ideas into the constituencies most likely to be receptive. They also know it is likely – and rightly – to alarm many others.
It is time to ring the alarm bells over the influence of dominionism in Australia and the very real threat it poses to our system of government, democracy and society.
Fall
In a very real sense Australian democracy has already fallen. Public trust in our institutions has collapsed. We have a government that simply does not listen.
We have a government under the influence of a religious ideology that advocates the establishment of a theocracy. Capturing the Government Mountain through “Archangels” is one of the keys to that.
We have a government whose behaviour and actions suggest that it has adopted the strategies and intent of the Seven Mountain Mandate. One indication of that is the Religious Freedom Bill.
One thing is certainly clear in all of this. This government needs to come clean on the influence of this religious ideology on its behaviour, policies and actions.
I will be writing more about these matters in the very near future.
Like what we do at The AIMN?
You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.
Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!
Your contribution to help with the running costs of this site will be gratefully accepted.
You can donate through PayPal or credit card via the button below, or donate via bank transfer: BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969
Successive Australian Governments and the Australian Public Service are used to dominating political decision making and discussion. Government speaks, mainstream media reports and from time to time there are rumblings from the community. In the main Australia has been a fairly silent state.
The political culture that has evolved is very much one of ‘being in charge’ and exercising power. That culture has not changed and what has grown up around it are practices that enable very serious abuses of power.
Community concern over the conduct of politics has grown massively in recent years and reached fever pitch under the Abbot government. People shared their concerns and information – and agitated for change. Persistent public discussion, especially on social media, was threatening the government and Tony Abbot was replaced.
Clearly, the Turnbull government has been focused on calming public discussion – of returning us to Australia’s silent state. Business as usual.
Unfortunately, the practices that provide the capability to abuse power remain. The continuation of these practices – all paid for with our taxes – are the building blocks of Australia’s silent state and are a betrayal of our democracy
Clearly, the culture of politics, government and the public service needs to change. Certainly, the capability to abuse power needs to be dismantled.
Abuses of power
Our recent post Bad Behaviour in the Public Service describes the Australian Public Service’s abusive use of psychiatry to label and intimidate public servants. The following statement by eminent psychiatrist Professor Allen Frances sums up the situation:
the power to label is the power to destroy.
This is precisely the power that the Australian Public Service has given itself – and uses against public servants. And don’t think for one minute that members of the public aren’t labelled and dismissed.
This is not the only form of power the Australian Public Service has given itself with the permission of successive governments. They have also given themselves extensive administrative and legal powers. All well and good if these powers are used to deliver to the public, respect our democracy and give us decency in government.
Problems arise when these powers are used to censor, intimidate and silence citizens and public servants – great harm is caused to individuals, a culture of lawlessness takes hold and democracy is betrayed. Sadly, this is what has been happening for a long time. The proof?
The millions of dollars wasted on trumped up psychiatric assessments and so-called human resource management.
The millions of dollars shoveled into the coffers of legal firms in order to win at all costs.
The millions of dollars spent on an army of administrative workers whose work contributes to masking the flagrant disregard for the Australian Public Service Code of Conduct, the flaunting of the model litigant rules and the gaming of the legal system.
Who does this hurt? Any member of the public who questions or disputes the actions of government agencies. Any public servant who, at even a low level, dares to question. Any public servants deemed to pose a risk – and that includes those who complain about being bullied and mobbed.
Why does this happen? Simple. Because the culture of government is riddled with an obsession with reputation, risk and always being right. Regardless.
What are the personal drivers behind this state of affairs? Two words – comfort and power.
What is the proof? Again this is simple. Strip away the spin and it is the Australian Government and its public service that are spending big money on this dangerous nonsense.
Actually, no. Don’t take away the spin. They spend millions, that is to say our millions, on that (spin), as well. It comes with the entire abusive package. Spin, what passes for communication with the public, is very important. No cost or effort is too great to preserve comfort, power and control. And to shape the perception of the public.
Hold this thought. The Australian Government and its public service are very concerned about how social media has shifted the communications dynamic between the public and them. We actually have the former Prime Minister, Tony Abbot, to thank for that. The peasants (us), were revolting and something had to be done. Tony Abbot is no longer PM and the government has changed its tone.
Betraying democracy
So here’s how it works when members of the public get noisy or, god forbid, challenge the Australian Government and its public service.
Silence – Raise a thorny issue and you will be ignored and, hopefully, go away.
Provide a BIFF response – This is interesting as responses given, whether by politicians or government agencies follow this pattern:
Keep your response brief.
Be informative – ‘just the facts’.
Adopt a friendly tone
Be firm
I don’t know if the High Conflict Institute intended for its approach to be used to spin the public, but I do know of some public servants who are enamoured of the high conflict notion. (Read more about BIFF responses here).
Most people call this being fobbed off. It is.
And think about this. If your circumstance is such that you persist you can always be labelled a high conflict person, subjected to psychiatric assessments, labelled a vexatious complainant or litigant and hounded from one end of the bureaucracy to another.
One version of the truth – This is the other driver. Australian Public Service agencies have long seen themselves as being the purveyors of THE TRUTH. That’s the service they provide to the Australian Government and what the public is meant to swallow.
The trouble is that public expectations have shifted and the embrace of social media has disrupted the one version of the truth thing. But that’s OK. There’s always media monitoring, metadata and the censorship of public servants.
It is much more convenient to deal with the mainstream media. Fractious as they can be they do provide a more manageable megaphone and relationships are well established.
Controlling public discussion – In contrast, managing and controlling public discussion is much harder. Especially when that discussion takes place via social media for all to see. This is why the Australian Government and its public service prefer to deal with the mainstream media. This is why they actively seek to chill public dialogue and censor public servants. This is one of the key reasons why they surveil and monitor.
So what does this mean for us? What these communications antics are all about is serving the Australian Government by promoting one version of the truth and preserving reputation. At one level that’s OK. At another it is a recipe for group think, manipulation and abuses of power.
What is not being asked is what it means for our democracy and society when this manipulation of the public is taking place against a backdrop of entrenched and normalised systemic abuses of power that directly and indirectly touch every man, woman and child in this country.
This is not a good recipe for decency in government and public service by a long shot. It is a betrayal of democracy, makes a mockery of open government and is an abject betrayal of the public that the government is meant to serve. All in the name of inducing silence, promoting self-censorship and preserving comfort and power.
Is this a conspiracy? If you want to call risk management, reputation management, communications management and the scooping up of vast amounts of information a conspiracy you are not that far off the mark. Certainly, there is a lot of over reach and vast amounts of money and effort are put into enabling abuses of power. And certainly there is a powerful convergence of interests driven by the culture of successive Australian Governments and the Australian Public Service.
As for smoke filled rooms, alien invasion and pouring mind controlling substances into the water supply. Forget it.
So, Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull and Opposition Leader Bill Shorten my questions to you both are:
What are you going to do to fix this mess?
What are you going to do to stop our taxes being used to fund abuses of power?
What are you going to do to focus public service effort on more positive endeavours?
This article was originally published on Ozloop.
Like what we do at The AIMN?
You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.
Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!
Your contribution to help with the running costs of this site will be gratefully accepted.
You can donate through PayPal or credit card via the button below, or donate via bank transfer: BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969
It may be premature to write Emeritus Chairman Rupert Murdoch’s epitaph now that he’s ostensibly handed the keys of his media empire to his favoured scion and heir, Lachlan.
Bubba Lachie, you will recall, is the infantile drongorecently forced to payouton a rather silly defamation action against our feisty independent cousin, Crikey.com.au, after daddy’s flagshit Fox News Network settled a defamation action brought against it by Dominion Voting Systems, opening yet another vein on the corporate corruption of (some) journalists and journalism within Murdoch’s bespoke empire.
Bubba Lachlan and Naughty Crikey
Dominion’s victory also conveniently proved the legal case forCrikey.
In a deliriously audacious and courageous flourish, Crikey took out afull-page advertisementin The New York Times challenging Lachlan Murdoch to make good his threat to sue over an alleged defamation. Bubba took the bait. Silly sad boy, Bubba.
Dominian proved case for Crikey
Basically, Dominion proved a bunch of Trumpian Fox News stooges masquerading as journalists, commentators, experts and news executives, promulgated lies about Dominion’s role in the 2020 presidential election.
Ultimately, Murdoch and Fox News were hoisted by the one petard. Dominion did us all a favour. Into the public domain and courtroom was tipped a container load of Murdoch/Fox News documents and data from their countless devices that proved unequivocally they were guilty as hell.
The Murdoch machine had to shut down the case. They settled. They paid up. But hey, not before the squalid and unethical behaviour of these entitled dudes was writ large upon the internet’s skies sans frontieres.
At US$797.5 million, It was a helluva payout, even though it was only half of what Dominion sought for injury caused to its reputation and business by Fox.
Uncle Sam became Uncle Spam
At the time, the unelected President Donald Trump might well have been the network’s prime anchor, such was his Fox profile. Fox morphed into the Zombie Trump News network. It was like, Trump 24/7.
Too much Trump was never enough. The endemic mantra it churned was that the election was rigged and that really, Americans had unanimously re-elected Trump. Uncle Sam became Uncle Spam.
Trump: Clickbait for Fox advertisers
But even before that, whilst Trump was still president, any appearance or call-in by the big guy was advertiser clickbait for Fox and friends. Ratings mean advertisers. The talking heads were vying with each other to get Trump on their shows and incessantly talked about him and interviewed experts and others who talked about him to get a ratings uptick.
While they were at it, they spread even more conspiracies and lies. With impunity. As the records now show, they knew their boss, ever the dirty digger, felt no shame in them clothing the butt naked truth in a transparent cloak made from immoral fibres threaded with lies.
Mother Fucker Carlson, Yawn Hannity, Laura Ingraham frontline pit bulls and bitches
Fox’s frontline pit bulls and bitches like the man they call ‘Mother Fucker Carlson’ (aka Tucker Carlson), Yawn Hannity (aka Sean Hannity) and Laura Ingraham, whose sobriquet I do not know, were three heavy hitters who were let off the corporate leash.
All three were indisputable propagandists for Brand Trump. You would be forgiven for thinking they were on his payroll and certainly via the ratings, he was contributing to theirs. There were others.
One thing is certain. Fox News Network and its journalistic mercenaries, still have a case to answer over their collective role in theattempted political coup and insurrection on the United States Capitol on January 6, 2021.
Fox: Flesh-eating ravings maul truth and democracy
Their on-air flesh-eating ravings contributed to the savage maulings of democracy, truth and journalism itself along with the unforgivable betrayal of the people by bearing false witness to the truth and the bleeding obvious.
If the Proud Boys were Trump’s Pretorian Guards, then Fox News, under the tutelage and watchful eye, we now know, of Commandant-in-Chief, Rupert Murdoch, provided the pussy grabber with a propaganda unit of whichJoseph Goebbelswould have been proud, such was its effectiveness in building upon nationalistic white supremacist fervor fueled by hate and fear, lies and more lies and fake news. Surely it/they, were the equivalent of a journalistic Squadrismo.
For the Fox juggernaut, raking in the money from advertisers and the pursuit of even more power and influence was the coveted prize. The Murdoch Machine collected the former whilst Murdoch pocketed the other. For him, power is a bottomless pit. Can’t get enough. Perhaps it’s what gets his rocks off. Perhaps he even covets power more than money.
Murdoch needed Trump. Trump needed Murdoch. Who was/is the neediest of them all? This is unfinished business. There is history yet to be writ.
Hannity goes gaga on Trump’s MAGA stage
Who can forget Hannity being summoned onstage by Trump at a Make America Great Again (MAGA) rally? Supporting causes is one thing, supporting messianic Trump, quite another. Supporting the Republican Party is one thing; endorsing Trump and exploiting his dangerous buffoonery and more, inflating Trump’s public persona to deific status, all served to turn America into Nation Trump. For a moment, Trump was America. And an America far removed from the nation that elected the likes of Barack Obama as its president.
In these dystopian times, such is the stuff of nightmares. Where was the American Dream on the day of the seige upon the bulwark of American democracy, once held up like Liberty’s lamp, as a beacon to the world? It was a warning to us all.
Murdoch’s journalism takes road most travelled
In all of this, are the globally wandering hands of an arch power monger: Rupert Murdoch. His kind of journalism invariably takes the road most traveled. How often he has sat back and commanded, encouraged, nurtured others to do his bidding.
Hannity’s odious master-servant relationship with Rupert Murdoch, emblematic of many, but certainly not all, of Rupert’s frontline journalistic mercenaries, especially those in the United States, Australia, as we here know only too well, and in the disunited kingdom, Britain, the off-shore home of our ownmeddling monarch, Charles.
This CNN video shows you that despite Hannity’s denials, his onstage appearance with Trump was clearly pre-ordained and for all we know, Trump wizened, puppeteer Rupert Murdoch himself, may have ordered this sickening display of media sycophancy and blatant ratings chase.
With breathtaking hypocrisy, his reflections reveal a brilliant and shrewd journalist who nontheless remains a deft proponent of industrial strength fake news, gross journalistic misconduct and Trumpian-like delusion on how he is perceived. Is he more King Lear than Citizen Kane?
The memo
Dear Colleagues,
I am writing to let you all know that I have decided to transition to the role of Chairman Emeritus at Fox and News. For my entire professional life, I have been engaged daily with news and ideas, and that will not change. But the time is right for me to take on different roles, knowing that we have truly talented teams and a passionate, principled leader in Lachlan who will become sole Chairman of both companies.
Neither excessive pride nor false humility are admirable qualities. But I am truly proud of what we have achieved collectively through the decades, and I owe much to my colleagues, whose contributions to our success have sometimes been unseen outside the company but are deeply appreciated by me. Whether the truck drivers distributing our papers, the cleaners who toil when we have left the office, the assistants who support us or the skilled operators behind the cameras or the computer code, we would be less successful and have less positive impact on society without your day-after-day dedication.
Our companies are in robust health, as am I. Our opportunities far exceed our commercial challenges. We have every reason to be optimistic about the coming years – I certainly am, and plan to be here to participate in them. But the battle for the freedom of speech and, ultimately, the freedom of thought, has never been more intense.
My father firmly believed in freedom, and Lachlan is absolutely committed to the cause. Self- serving bureaucracies are seeking to silence those who would question their provenance and purpose. Elites have open contempt for those who are not members of their rarefied class. Most of the media is in cahoots with those elites, peddling political narratives rather than pursuing the truth.
In my new role, I can guarantee you that I will be involved every day in the contest of ideas. Our companies are communities, and I will be an active member of our community. I will be watching our broadcasts with a critical eye, reading our newspapers and websites and books with much interest, and reaching out to you with thoughts, ideas, and advice. When I visit your countries and companies, you can expect to see me in the office late on a Friday afternoon.
I look forward to seeing you wherever you work and whatever your responsibility. And I urge you to make the most of this great opportunity to improve the world we live in.
Murdoch’s obsession with father, Sir Keith
Keith Murdoch in war correspondent mode Photo: Wikipedia
The memo reveals Murdoch’s well-known obsession with his father, Sir Keith Murdoch, on whose media foundations, Murdoch the younger built his monopolistic empire. In fact, Keith Rupert Murdoch was named for his father and seems to have spent his life endeavouring to prove himself as his father’s equal and more, to his much-loved mother and matriarch of the clan Dame Elisabeth Murdoch.
The beautiful, redoubtable and indefatigable Dame Elisabeth, a noted philanthropist and tireless community entrepeneur, she lived a life of enduring public service. She founded and/or supported so many community initiatives and was still involved up to the time of her death at 103 in 2012.
Indeed, she bequeathed the family home,Cruden Farm, with its famed gardens designed by Edna Walling, to the people. Cruden was where Rupert and his three sisters spent their childhood.
Elisabeth Joy Greene was a mere slip of a 19-year-old who caused a minor scandal when she married the handsome ambitious Keith, because he was 23 years older than she.
It is said that serial matrimonialist Rupert’s penchant for much younger brides, is due in part to the loving relationship and dynamism between his parents.
Dame Elisabeth adored the lauded journalist Sir Keith, ofGallipoli Letterfame and practically deified him after he died. Rupert’s endeavours could never match let alone eclipse that of her beloved husband. She disapproved of his salacious newspapers and the gratuitous Page 3 girls. And she certainly disapproved of Wendi Deng.
Dame Elisabeth gives Rupert Bollocking over turfing Anna for Wendi
An insider told me Dame Elisabeth gave Rupert a right bollocking about the way he discarded and divorced his second wife, Glasgow born Anna Torv, for Deng.
Anna Murdoch’s business acumen contributed to Murdoch’s empire building.
“As well as being beautiful, she has brains, she’s savvy, bright and clever, really sharp. She’s also very warm and has that ability to put people at ease. She’s a wonderful hostess and had no trouble adapting to New York’s high society, such as it was. She reeked old money rather than new. She has a grace about her. But she’s tough as tungsten, a bit like her mother-in law, or should I say her ex mother in law, who was very angry with Rupert. Rupert was a bastard, the way that he treated her at the end. She’s also well read, witty and very funny.
When Wendi Deng had an affair with Blair, I thought to myself, right, Rupert you bastard, now you know what it feels like.”
Deng Murdoched in cold blood
Wendi Deng, you will recall, was rather fond of Tony Blair’s “butt.” The publicly cuckolded Rupert expedited a speedy divorce. As usual. Deng, who has two daughters with the tichoon, was Murdoched in cold blood.
Blair has denied any liaisons with Deng, dangereuses or otherwise. But then, he lied about the Iraq War.
A Catholic, Anna Murdoch bore three ofRupert Murdoch’s six childrenby three mothers. Lachlan, James and Elisabeth just happen to be the key media players in the family.
In a world exclusive with David Leser in the then Kerry Packer owned Australian Women’s Weekly the usually discreet second wife, married to Murdoch for 31 years, told it like it was.
… She described her state of shock at the divorce, her wish not to appear as a victim and her feeling of “coming out of a deep mental illness”. She also detailed the way that, despite reports of an amicable separation, she was unceremoniously dumped as a non-executive director of News Corp. Of her once-admired partner, who she helped to secure a papal knighthood in 1998, she said: “I began to think the Rupert Murdoch that I loved died a long time ago. Perhaps I was in love with the idea of still being in love with him. But the Rupert I fell in love with could not have behaved this way.”
The since remarried and renamed Anna Murdoch Mann, was brutally honest and one can sense her pain and injury at that time.
… “I think that Rupert’s affair with Wendi Deng – it’s not an original plot – was the end of the marriage. His determination to continue with that. I thought we had a wonderful, happy marriage. Obviously, we didn’t.” She went on: “I don’t want to get too personal about this… but [he] was extremely hard, ruthless and determined that he was going to go through with this, no matter what I wanted or what I was trying to do to save the marriage. He had no interest in that whatsoever.”
She also revealed she’d been forced off the Board of News Corp on which she sat, alongside Lachlan. She wasn’t given a choice, she told Leser.
Perhaps to prove he is his own man and truly owns his chairmanship, Bubba Lachie might reconsider a role for the now Anna dePeyser.
In 1998, Rupert Murdoch joined dozens of prominent Southern California Catholics who were awarded a papal knighthood.
Murdoch, who was thought to have converted to Catholicism, stated a while back, he wasn’t baptised in the faith, but would accompany Anna to Mass.
Hisdonations of large sums of moneyto local Catholic churches was rewarded with the Order of Knight Commander of St Gregory the Great, conferred in 1998. It works in much the same way as donating monies to political parties, perhaps not so effective. Dame Anna also received the same papal award, although that fact received less attention.
It’s said that Anna leaned on Cardinal Roger Mahony who in turn, leaned on the Pope to secure their Honours.
The camel, eye of the needle and rich man Rupert
Because of the phone hacking and Dominion scandals, there have since been calls for Murdoch to be stripped of his papal knighthood.
Here’s Anna Murdoch’s clever quip after the ceremony, that had Rupert chortling:
Rupert: “I thought it was very spiritual and very moving. I was very impressed by what the cardinal said.”
Anna: “I think it was very humbling.
We’re both trying to get through the eye of the needle. Perhaps this is the beginning.”
Some of you will recognize Anna Murdoch’s wry and telling alluding to the words ofNew Testamentgospeller Matthew(verse 19.24) reporter-at-large for Jesus, quoted as saying:
“It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God.”
* Some scholars contend the translation of the word ‘camel’ should be ‘rope‘ but hey, let’s not get into the fake news bizzo.
Note Anna’s use of the word ‘humbling.’ Years later, after appearing before the UK’s House of Commons Committee investigating Murdoch’s News of the World phone hacking scandal in July, 2011, he referred to it as “the most humble day of my life.” Not only did he eat humble pie, but it was also the day he had a cream pie thrown at him, the security breach bravely thwarted by his then wife Wendi Deng. Talk about having the cake and eating it too.
Murdoch’s memo: He’s still on Planet Fox!
Murdoch’s memo wasn’t only to his minions. It was also a press release to the world and no doubt he hopes that obituary writers in due course, will quote the noble sentiments he espouses.
His words also reflect the pathos and reflection of those of us who hover closer to death than life. In his carnal pursuit for power, Rupert Murdoch has strayed far from the rebellious swashbuckling disrupter he once was. There is self-pity in his reckoning words, is there not? Truisms as well:
… But the battle for the freedom of speech and, ultimately, the freedom of thought, has never been more intense…
No mention of the fact that time and again such freedoms have been savagely mauled by he and his media outlets, News of the World, Fox News Network et al.
Then there is this:
… My father firmly believed in freedom, and Lachlan is absolutely committed to the cause…
Here’s an apt cliché whilst I get a fresh vomitbag. The apple doesn’t fall far from the tree. Bubba Lachie is so committed to the cause of freedom, that one of his first grown up actions as chairman of daddy’s empire,was to nominatenone other than a man renowned for his suppressive rigid right-wing politics and views, former Prime Minister Tony Abbott for the board of Fox Corporation.
Who better than the bloke who scurried out of Parliament to avoid voting in the same sex marriage debate?
News.com.au’s Liz Burke fingeredAbbott this way:
“… But when it came time to vote – and he could have voted against it = he made a gutless lurch for the door.
Mr Abbott’s weak act didn’t have anything to do with democracy, it was a protest against it. And history won’t forget that.”
There’s a litany of testimonials about Abbott’s attempts to curtail, even abolish freedoms of all kinds, so I guess that makes him a perfect candidate.
Surely, disgraced ex Qantas Chief Alan Joyce, will be next.
Murdoch speaks of ethics, denounces elites
Perhaps the more egregious calumny embedded in Murdoch’s memo is this paragraph:
…Self- serving bureaucracies are seeking to silence those who would question their provenance and purpose. Elites have open contempt for those who are not members of their rarefied class. Most of the media is in cahoots with those elites, peddling political narratives rather than pursuing the truth.
Such abject hypocrisy. Such pathos. It smacks of Murdoch’s perennial interference with the truth; nothing more than a press release from which he hopes obituaries writers will quote. Nothing else to see here. No 13-year-old murdered Milly Parker phone to hack today. Don’t mention the war on truth.
Milly Dowler and her family were/are no elites. The cruel violation of their grief and family privacy was as an inside joke to the then News of the World.
Can you imagine a News journalist hacking Dame Elisabeth’s phone messages after she died? It wouldn’t be right. But Murdoch journalists and agents thought it was alright for little Milly.
How dare Murdoch give us a lecture on freedom and ethics. Both are beggars in the Murdoch millieu.
His words are from a man closer to death than to life, like many of us. What happened to that reforming swashbuckling disrupter of the media who lived and breathed journalism. At what point was journalism cast asunder for the power and the glory?
When I read Murdoch’s memo, the words about the elites rang a bell. Sure enough, Murdoch, who I’m told, has written his own obituary for publication throughout his media outlets, both electronic and print, must keep it in the second drawer on the right. Cop this 2015 tweet (X):
Much fuss and publicity in UK as horrible elites yak on about Page 3. Worry not, The Sun will always have great looking women – and men!
Certain people were alarmed that I’d discussed Murdoch use of SawPalmetto used, among other things for sexual dysfunction. He couldn’t get it up. No shame in that.
He had a wife 37 years his junior. Then again, age doesn’t matter when one is in love. Right?
Moreover, I’d seen and verified correspondence and the physician concerned also verified it to me in person. I was told that Murdoch was furious at the revelation – and comments I made in relation to his father Sir Keith. Sacred ground.
I thought of theMilly Dowler phone hacking scandaland the obscene, cruel and brutal invasion of that murdered little 13-year-old schoolgirl’s forever grieving family and the gross moral turpitude of the News of the World and I thought this is a man who can dish it out but can’t take it.
Milly Dowler, with her dad, Bob. Photo: Daily Mail
Imagine if a News of the World journalist/agent hacked Dame Elisabeth’s phone messages before or after she died.
We are publishing the article in full because it contains pertinent matters hardly discussed in the hagiography written about Rupert Murdoch’s abdication as Chairman.
Murdoch most foul
(Originally published on Independent Australia)
DOES it really matter if Rupert used Saw Palmetto to increase his libido to service his young wife?
Does it really matter that despite industrial strength botox and other wrinkle spakfillers Rupert Murdoch still looks like a pantomime Dame and decades older than his Mother?
You can’t blame him for wanting to be Peter Pan for his Wendi.
Here’s the headline. Came to me in a flash. “Linga Longa Denga” Gotcha!
Does it really matter that the late Professor John Avieson, who wrote a still unpublished and not entirely flattering biography of Sir Keith Murdoch, was warned by Dame Elisabeth Murdoch at a social gathering that the book would never see the light of day as long as she lived?
Does it really matter if Murdoch bought the Wall Street Journal in 2007 as marital insurance for his ‘China Doll’ (a more polite employee nickname than Chairman’s Mao) to call her own in the event of his premature death or ejaculation as Chairman or in the event of clan ructions or corporate infarction?
Well yes, brothers and sisters. It matters. And it matters mightily.
Okay, the WSJ might not be the Taj Mahal, but it’s up there in media mogul terms of journalistic prestige. Or was. Maybe now it will get its mojo back.
Of course, Rupert might have bought it for the former Deng Wen Ge (thank you Eric Ellis) toget backat the Bancroft family who’d owned it for 100 years, because just seven years earlier, the Journal published an article about Wendi he didn’t like.
You know, like the obverse of the famous ad – he hated the company so much he bought it.
He has a reputation as a man who cradles grudges and who never forgets a slight.
But intercorporate rutting is a boardroom artform. I believe the Bancroft family isstill representedon the Board.
This stuff is right up the rectal columns of stabloids like The Sun and The News of the World and the Murdoch media in general. Why shouldn’t it be? What’s good for the goose is good for the propaganda.
It isnews and it’s fit to print. But whilst you’ll read such things about celebrities and we of the great unwashed, you won’t read it about Big Daddy.
You won’t read about it in his newspapers. And you won’t read about it in other papers that he might as well own by default and by virtue of an extended coterie of power and influence.
We forget that the rebirth of The News of the World under Murdoch was baptised inmurder and mystery just as in the wake of its death throes, there is great sorrow and mystery at how the courageous whistleblower of the phone hacking scandal, journalist Sean Hoare was found dead in his Watford home on Monday.
Writing about him in yesterday’s Guardian, investigative journalist Nick Davies, described Sean as “a lovely man”.
Explaining why he had spoken out, he [Sean] told me:
“I want to right a wrong, lift the lid on it, the whole culture. I know, we all know, that the hacking and other stuff is endemic. Because there is so much intimidation. In the newsroom, you have people being fired, breaking down in tears, hitting the bottle.”
“He knew this very well, because he was himself a victim of the News of the World. As a show-business reporter, he had lived what he was happy to call a privileged life. But the reality had ruined his physical health:
“I was paid to go out and take drugs with rock stars – get drunk with them, take pills with them, take cocaine with them. It was so competitive. You are going to go beyond the call of duty. You are going to do things that no sane man would do. You’re in a machine.”
Nick Davies, it should be said, must rank among the more courageous of journalists in his relentless work to uncover and publish the truth about the News of the World Hacking Scandal.
I doubt that anyone in Australia would have easily published it here. And that is an indictment of the moral cowardice of our profession. Perhaps we will find greater courage now that the beast is wounded.
When one contemplates the blind and steadfast courage of the likes of Sean Hoare and lost lives of citizen journalists and correspondents in the frontline of war and terrorism, our comfortable and flaccid obeisance to a media tsar is a betrayal of all that we should hold dear and worthy.
I think of young journalists I know, who in the Bosnian war, daily risked their lives to keep radio stations and communications open for foreign reporters.
I think of Libya, of Egypt, of Pakistan, of Afghanistan and Somalia and Sudan and the wholesale slaughter of journalists in the Philippines and elsewhere.
I think of Iran. I think of revolutions perfumed with jasmine and blood and the stench of fear.
And I think of how easily we here and in Britain and the States, squander our freedoms. And how easily our silence is purchased.
And how often we do unto others that which we would never want done to ourselves.
And of how the Fourth Estate is so often barren ground. Of how truth and justice and compassion are spent seed upon its harsh surface.
It seems that Sean Hoare had a not untroubled life. But still he found in his heart and in his conscience a shared humanity that compelled him to knowingly jeopardise his life and most certainly his career to expose the truth to The New York Times and fine journalists like Nick Davies.
I am alarmed at how, almost immediately, police reports were filtering out stating there were no suspicious circumstances over Sean Hoare’s death.
Given the indecent alliances between the police, News Corporation and politicians, asking us to have faith in anything any one of these groups does at the moment is too big an ask.
Like most, Sean had his demons, but even they could not mar his sense of justice. At least he exorcised one by telling us the truth and he has undoubtedly altered the global media landscape in doing so.
If you read Nick’sfull articlehere, you will get a better picture of both Sean and Nick.
Writing in Sunday’s Independent, journalist Jonathan Owen backgrounded some unsavoury connections between the NOTW, private investigators and some interesting information about Rebekah of sunny Brooks animal farm.
Two former senior News of the World editors wanted for questioning by police
Detectives investigating phone-hacking allegations at the News of the World are keen to question two former senior journalists at the newspaper. Scotland Yard officers have been told the two, former executive editor Alex Marunchak and deputy news editor Greg Miskiw, were both key figures linked to the use of private investigators to access confidential information.
Rebekah Brooks appointed Mr Miskiw as the News of the World’s assistant editor in charge of news, and it was he who employed Glenn Mulcaire, the private investigator at the heart of the phone-hacking scandal.
… After examining documents taken from Mulcaire’s home, police are anxious to question Mr Miskiw, who is living in Florida. His also featured in documents obtained by police following a raid on the Hampshire home of private detective Steve Whittamore, who was used by a large number of journalists to obtain information about public figures. Whittamore was later convicted under the Data Protection Act in 2005 at Blackfriars Crown Court of obtaining and disclosing information after passing information obtained from the police national database to customers.
Whittamore’s network was investigated and broken up by the Information Commissioner, who discovered he was accessing sensitive information from the Police National Computer, the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Authority, British Telecom and a number of mobile phone companies.
The investigation, called Operation Motorman, showed 23 journalists from the News of the World hired Whittamore more than 200 times. The names include Rebekah Brooks, who allegedly commissioned access to confidential data from a mobile phone company.
Mr Miskiw is known to be a close friend of Mr Marunchak, a former crime reporter and senior executive at the NOTW. The two reportedly had mutual business arrangements including the importation of vodka from Ukraine. Mr Marunchak, who left the newspaper in 2006, claims to have been appointed as a special adviser to Ukraine’s UK embassy in 1999.
Mr Marunchak is said to be a friend of a private investigator called Jonathan Rees who was employed by the NOTW to help provide reporters with illegally obtained confidential information. Rees was later jailed for falsely planting cocaine in an innocent woman’s car but was re-employed by the NOTW’s editor Andy Coulson after he served his sentence. [My emphasis]
Detectives also suspected Rees of bribing corrupt officers to supply information to the media. A surveillance operation was carried out on Rees including a bug being placed in his office. It was later revealed that among the hours of taped conversations were many between Mr Marunchak and Rees discussing transactions involving thousands of pounds for work carried out for the newspaper.
[Clickhereto read the Independent‘s powerful larger story.]
The gutless self-censorship in this country about Rupert Murdoch and his various media dealings is disgusting. We have yet to address our own media cankers.
How many Australian or UK newspapers have ever retold the undoubtedly bizarre and ripping yarn ofthe tragic story of Muriel McKay, who was mistakenly kidnapped instead of Rupert’s then wife, Anna, a few days after Christmas Day in December 1969 – the same year Murdoch bought The News of the World?
The hapless Muriel, wife of Alick McKay, then Deputy Chairman of News of the World (he wasn’t made a Lord until 1976) was actually driving the Murdoch’s Rolls Royce whilst the Murdochs were in Australia.
Alick McKay returned to his Wimbledon home to find the doors forced and Muriel missing.
In a saga that belongs on the ‘tall tales but true’ shelf, it transpired that two brothers, Arthur and Nizamodeen Hosein, who were living beyond their means on a country estate and vainly trying to insinuate their way into a disdainful British establishment, apparently saw Rupert Murdoch being interviewed by David Frost and thought it would be a good idea to kidnap Anna for a ransom that would put an end to their financial woes.
The Jamaican-born brothers were subsequently caught and charged with kidnapping, murder and blackmail. Both were given life sentences. I understand that Nizamodeen Hosein is now back in Jamaica and have unconfirmed reports that Arthur Hosein is now out of prison and lives in England.
If ever there was a cold case begging to be re-examined, this is it; given the advances in forensic science and if there’s anyone left at Scotland Yard.
Tragically, Muriel McKay’s body still hasn’t been found. It is said that her body was dismembered and fed to the pigs.
Lucky that the sub editor who wrote theinfamous headline‘FREDDIE STARR ATE MY HAMSTER’ was not on duty that day.
The Australian Labor Party was founded by striking shearers during the Australian Shearers strike in 1891 under the Tree of Knowledge in Barcaldine. Unlike the Eureka stockade in 1854 where rebelling unionists striking on unfair mining licenses against the Victorian Colonial Government were acquitted after the battle. One of the leaders Peter Lalor became the Speaker of Victoria’s Parliament. The striking leaders of Barcaldine were not acquitted and forced to serve time on St Helena in Brisbane’s Bay side.
Like the leaders of Eureka these leaders ended up becoming engaged in parliamentary politics as social democrats. William Hamilton, William Fothergill, Julian Stuart, and George Taylor all served sentences on St Helena for a time. Upon their release after several years in prison. Hamilton later became the MP for Gregory, and later the Qld Legislative Council and its President. Fothergill became a Barcaldine Alderman, Deputy Mayor, and later Mayor. While Stuart and Taylor returned to Western Australia.
In 1899 the world’s first Labor Government was elected in Queensland under Anderson Dawson (which only lasted 7 days) followed by Chris Watson who would become Australia and the world’s first Labor Prime Minister (in 1904 in a government that last 3 and half months). In 1904–1907 Qld Labor governed in a coalition government with Liberals. Labor in the 1890s–1900s became a successful political force. It also held the balance of power in the Australian parliament in coalition with the early protectionist government of Barton and Deakin in 1901–1904, and 1905–1908, before gaining enough support on its own to gain its first majority federally in 1910 under Andrew Fisher, while TJ Ryan won a majority as Premier in 1915 in the state parliament (Dyrenfurth, N. Bongiorno, F. 2011).
Ever since, the Australian Labor Party has been a political force to reckon with on the centre–left, with social democrats achieving significant reforms as a nation building party of the Australian political system. We all have welfare benefits, workers’ rights, the weekend, 40 hour week, penalty rates, universal healthcare in Medicare, superannuation, the NDIS, post war migration, Snowy River Hydro scheme, infrastructure like the Sydney Harbour bridge (Sydney), Story Bridge (Brisbane) Anti-Discrimination Act, no-fault divorce laws, Sex Discrimination Act, Native Title, Environmental protection of Antarctica, the CSIRO, ASIO, easier accessibility into high school and tertiary education, an Apology to the Stolen Generations – all thanks to Labor Governments. Labor has had a successful track record as social democratic movement compared to political movements globally.
With strong track records on both the state and local level as well: 70 years in Qld, 69 years in Tasmania, 63 years in NSW, 57 years in Western Australia, 54 years in South Australia, and 51 years in Brisbane City Council across all the voting electoral history of Australia since the 20th century.
A long history of internal party reforms
Despite Labor’s successes, there are moments where reform internally was needed. The first being the conscription issue. Where members of the ALP led by Labor figures like Frank Anstey (mentor to John Curtin) and TJ Ryan successfully pushed Billy Hughes out of the ALP as Prime Minister in late 1916 during the height of World War One. There were also figures like Ted Theodore who as Treasurer in the Scullin Government unsuccessfully advocated for Keynesian economic stimulus which Labor Premier William Forgan Smith advocated in his economic policies funding many of his programs which included benefiting the unemployment on construction projects at the University of Qld, and Story Bridge. Whilst Theodore was unsuccessful his policies were later adopted by both major political parties in Labor and the Coalition during times of economic hardship over the next century, particularly during the 1960s recessions, GFC, and COVID–19 pandemic.
At the time Keynesian methods were seen as controversial and split the ALP with Joseph Lyons and his supporters joining the Coalition to lead Australia as Prime Minister on the right and Jack Lang on the Left thinking the reforms didn’t go far enough forming their own Labor Party during the 1930s (Depression years). Former journalist John Curtin – who advocated against the conscription during the First World War – would become the new Labor leader and Opposition Leader during the Depression wildness years for the federal ALP. Ben Chifley and John Curtin were tasked with the necessary reforms needed to rebuild the ALP into a political body able to become electable particularly in NSW where the 2nd split did long-lasting damage to the party’s chances. The conciliatory leadership of Curtin and Chifley rebuilt Labor, uniting it in time for the Second World War (particularly in NSW) which Labor successfully led Australia through until its early post war years from 1941–1949, pushing for post-war reconstruction and benefits to assist everyday Australians.
As the post war years set in with Cold War hysteria and Labor once again faced a 3rd split, this time on Communism, and the hysteria of the Vietnam War which Labor opposed under Arthur Calwell (former Curtin/Chifley minister and Fabian). Fabian member and reformist Gough Whitlam rose through the ranks to lead the ALP in 1967 with a strong focus on Australia moving away from the White Australia Policy and advocated a strong reform agenda on national health cover, free education, land rights for Indigenous people, funding the arts, improving relations with Asia and China and withdrawing troops from Vietnam. To win government Whitlam had to focus heavily on the participants and Fabians like Race Matthews and Barry Jones, reforming the Victorian ALP away from oligarchic rule of old dominant Left faction at the time which continued with the help of the Independents in the 1970s–1980s in the Victorian ALP.
Whitlam was elected in 1972 as Prime Minister at a time that Labor had spent 23 years federally in the wilderness. Under Whitlam’s Treasurer and successor as Labor leader Bill Hayden from Qld advocated for strong reform in the party particularly in Qld which the Communist split cost Qld Labor government in 1957. The factions of the Old Guard left-wing Trades Hall controlled the ALP until the intervention of 1980–1989, where Labor did not win a state election for a record 32 years where the Country/National party reigned supreme under Frank Nicklin/Joh Bjelke–Petersen and successors.
The reform group were particularly focused on environmental, civil liberties for First Nations peoples and LGBTIQ people, and women’s issues. Led by Denis Murphy, Manfred Cross, George Georges, Wilf Ardil, Terry Hampson, and Mike Reynolds aligned with support from party organisers Peter Beattie and Wayne Goss. The intervention laid the groundwork where the branch rank-and-file could have more of a say whereas prior to 1980 it was a union-controlled party (Yarrow, S. 2015). The reforms made Labor electable over the next decade where Wayne Goss became Premier of Qld (1989-1996). Under Goss much of the issues Qld ALP reformers and Fabians advocated for, became government policy; such as the decriminalization of LGBTIQ status, the Fitzgerald Inquiry recommendations into corruption, and ending sand mining on Fraser Island. Labor also benefited from Hayden’s party reforms for 13 years federally under the leadership of PMs Bob Hawke/Paul Keating who reshaped the health system, environment, welfare, and both Indigenous and women’s rights.
Political Wilderness under Howard era (1996 – 2007) to the Rudd/Gillard (2007 – 2013) era
During the Hawke/Keating era, factions of the ALP became more institutionalized, thanks to the reforms of Hayden. Factions have always existed in political parties since time immemorial, but they became more accepted during the 1970s-early 1980s of the ALP as society changed and to avoid party infighting having learned from the lessons for 3 party splits federally, and 4 on a state level. William Kidston objected to the socialist objective in 1907 and resigned from the ALP as Premier. Hawke also organised the Labor Accords with the business and trade union communities to ensure stability. Factions exist but perhaps more in Labor where it was used by the Coalition during the Menzies era to the Coalitions advantage when highlighting the “Faceless Men of the ALP”. Because they are so entrenched in Labor they can be a tricky area to manoeuvre. I was in 2 during my Young Labor days having been a whip in the Young Left state conferences, socializing with the Soft Left subgroup and recruiter while also assisting the moderates in the Old Guard Unity in my mid-20s after becoming disillusioned on certain social circles, preselections, and party policy areas relating to First Nations issues and the environment.
On the left is the ETU (electricians), UWU (miscellaneous; representing blue collar workers who are; cleaners, childcare workers, disability support, hospitality, health, aged care, logistics, supermarket supply, security, farming, manufacturing, and market research), the AMWU (Australian Manufacturing Union), the CFMMEU (Construction Forestry Maritime Mining and Energy Union) and on the Right is the AWU (Australian Workers Union), the TWU (Transport Workers Union), and the SDA (Shop Distribution Association) which had been controversially known for its part in the Industrial Groups in the 1950s-1980s and the DLP (Democratic Labor Party) during the communist split. The Left has usually been more in favour of economic interventionist policies while supportive of social justice issues, while the ALP right has been more politically liberal.
In most cases factions worked within the system of the party and through conferences, meetings, conciliations to cut deals on matters of both senate local preselections via the electoral college, which the union bosses to this day have some say over. Not all unions in the ACTU are part of the ALP despite some of their staff being active in the party. But a majority of the unions involved in the ACTU and Qld Council of Unions are affiliated members of the party. Most ALP staff and unionist organise around themselves being in a faction to climb the political ladder and have sway over their preferred candidates and policies. But most ALP branch members are not aligned with a faction, nor are all of Labor’s politicians. In 2003 former Labor and ACTU leader Simon Crean sacrificed his leadership by granting more say for branch members in preselections. The unions in turn turned from Beazley to Crean, to Latham to Beazley upon defeat after defeat.
During the Rudd/Gillard era Labor abolished the controversial and highly unpopular WorkChoices laws introduced by the Howard government, introduced the Fair Work Commission, increased LGBTIQ financial rights, apologised to the Stolen Generations, stimulated the economy during the GFC maintaining a triple-A credit rating, introducing a Commission into Child Sexual Abuse, the NDIS, the NBN, improved international relations with Asia particularly India and China, paid parental leave, reforming the Murray River water management, transforming federal/state health funding, reforming secondary education and expanding tertiary education, withdrawing troops from both Iraq and Afghanistan and instituting a carbon price. Despite these achievements the Rudd/Gillard era was eclipsed by the egos of constant leadership spills and revolving doors which was due to several contributing factors; personality politics, union bosses, reliance on 24/7 news cycle and polling. On the mornings of 24th June 2010 and 27th June 2013 Australian voters woke up to a new Prime Minister in both occasions where the Australian people didn’t have a say on the change of Prime Minister. True, this had occurred 4 times historically when Stanley Bruce and Earle Page rolled Billy Hughes in 1923 as Nationalist Prime Minister, Robert Menzies returning from an overseas trip to Britain to a divided Coalition unhappy with his first leadership term in 1941 resigning for Arthur Fadden, William McMahon rolling Liberal Prime Minister John Gorton in 1971, and the Hawke/Keating spills of 1991.
But due to a 24/7 news cycle and digital space the attention became more focused and refined from a time where print media was moderate in the public space and attention span. In response to the infighting a lacklustre federal election result in 2010 John Faulkner and former NSW Premier Bob Carr and former Victorian Premier Steve Bracks recommended more branch rank and file say in the rules and preselection process of the wider ALP in the form of a review. Rudd – during his brief second term as Labor leader – introduced the 50:50 leadership rules where the branch members and party members would have half of the proportional say in future Labor leadership elections or spills. Where the over half would be decided by the federal parliamentary wing of the ALP. On a state level in the aftermath election loss of Anna Bligh to Campbell Newman’s LNP where Labor had only secured 7 seats to the LNP’s 78 seats.
The party’s greatest success in structure also became its undoing in the 21st century, especially as unionists accused some reformers of being “anti-unionist” while reformers said of some union bosses of being “antidemocratic”. In some ways it was difficult to many internally who were pro-reform yet also proudly union. Unfortunately, like most institutions in a modern context union membership today sits at 1.5 million (estimate) according to 2016 figures while it was 2.5 million in 1976 (Bramble, T. 2008). As of 2020 at the start of the pandemic the ALP federally has 60,085 members with the Coalition on a similar number nationally. A big change when compared to the days when a major political party of Australia held a membership of almost 200,000 members in the 1950s and a declining primary vote since 1949-1972, exacerbated in the 1990s-early 2000s. [Figure 1.0].
Recent Reforms during Recent Wilderness and Rise of ALBO! (2013 – Present)
In 2013 after the federal election loss of Labor to the Coalition, local Labor was founded along with Open Labor in Victoria to support ALP party reform again in a more modern context. The QLD Labor branch introduced 30:30:30 as a compromise with the unions having a contributing say for branch members, and the parliamentary members in the State Parliamentary wing of the party. Most of the recommendations of Faulkner, Carr, and Bracks were largely ignored in NSW until after the 2015 election loss with the ALP out of state power since 2011. The captain’s pick of then Indigenous sports star Nova Perris as Senate candidate over long-term Labor Senator Trish Crossin (1998-2013), and Qld Senator Jan McLucas who won 57% of the branch vote but lost the union vote and support in 2016’s preselection in the lead up to the 2016 Federal election.
Local Labor was led by Stuart J Whitman; a Townsville Labor acolyte of party reformer and former Qld Speaker Mike Reynolds, Rudd staffer and supporter. He was assisted by Rudd staffers Brad Newman, Rod Biesel (Annerley Labor Branch and Leftie), Kevin Conway (former public servant, Labor Leftie, later state and federal Fabians Secretary), Mike Smith (Labor Leftie, public servant who also grass roots campaigned with the US Democrats in 2012’s US Presidential elections), Kerrie Kahlon (former Australian Young Labor President), Chaiy Donati (whom I originally had disagreements within Young Labor, who was originally from the AWU right and later moderate reformer who was the former President of Qld Young Labor). I also endorsed the reforms as Labor Branch Secretary, Vice-President and President (2012-2015, 2017) in the Cleveland area as well as being the Vice-President of both the Bowman FEC and Cleveland SEC and was the SEC Secretary for a time also assisting in a Labor Party conference vote as the Returning Officer for Bowman.
Before becoming disillusioned with the party processes in 2017 over First Nations and environmental issues surrounding the Adani and Toondah Harbour PDA issues, the ALP lost the 2019 federal election on negative gearing, tax policies and the Adani issue namely in Qld. I remained active in Labor LEAN only from 2017–2020 on the Toondah campaign, Assistant Secretary and Interim Secretary of the Qld Fabians (2016–2018) and advocating for the unemployed in the AUWU in 2020 during the pandemic before working in Cr Peter Cummings Wynnum Manly ward BCC office (former Labor leader of BCC 2016-2020). I was briefly the Local Labor Secretary in 2017 where Local Labor were successful in advocating for a code of conduct policy with the Qld branch of the ALP when former state MP Evan Moorhead was State Secretary. Considering former candidates being improperly managed or bullying in the party particularly in areas of Young Labor or across Branches. Such as the case of Peter Watson in 2012 who made neo-Nazi and gay slur comments or in some cases discrimination and sexual harassment.
As a proud union member and supporter more branch rank-and-file say could be seen as controversial but considering how less Australians view unions less relevant to them. Having union members encouraged to join the ALP to be part of the process as branch members could be a good thing. I’ll never forget an AWU organizer shouting at the 2013 Qld State Labor conference “If its broke don’t fix it!”. Not helpful comments considering how Labor at the time had lost elections across the board on every levels of government.
As Whitlam once professed in his speech in the 1967 annual conference of the Victorian ALP, “Only the Impotent are Pure” when describing the self-defeatism culture of the ALP then prominent in Victorian Labor. Members and former MPs also called for an independent dispute’s tribunal in the party. Former Labor leader Bill Shorten even called for increased membership involvement in preselection’s for the Lower House (70:30 split between local members and a central panel) and for the Senate (50:50 split), increased AA (affirmative action for women), and direct elections of delegates to the national conference(s) of the ALP. As of 2014-2017, there was shift to the ALP in Victoria (2014), Queensland (2015), and Western Australia (2017). Unfortunately, despite the good these governments did it was clear there was still room for improvement as was the case of Adem Somyurek (former Andrews Minister) who according to 60 Minutes was behind a massive branch staking operation in the 48th Victorian Parliament.
These issues mirrored the Shepherdson Inquiry in Queensland Labor in 2000 during the Beattie era, when 3 MPs and several party officials with links to the AWU right of the QLD ALP had links to falsified documentation of branch recruitment. One of which scenario included recruiting dead people into a Labor Branch from a cemetery. This saga saw the downfall of 3 state MPs including Deputy Premier Jim Elder, who was a long-term Goss/Beattie minister as well, and former State Secretary of the QLD ALP in 1993–2000, Mike Kaiser. all in the lead up to a state election. Like Peter Beattie in 2001, Daniel Andrews in 2022 used accountability front and centre to their election campaigns and Labor increased its vote. As the MPs in question relating to the branch stacking controversies resigned, a notable temporary reform pursued by Local Labor and Open Labor groups was the Labor Academy in South Australia to ethically train new ALP activist and staff on skills-based focused rather than the revolving door of using Young Labor factionalism as a means of recruitment.
Today in the current parliament there are several new independent MPs, namely the TEALs (environmentally savvy MPs funded by the group Climate200). The surge of Greens MPs in South-East Qld Brisbane seats and Melbourne which has steadily been rising since 2010 along with increasing TEAL aligned MPs. Although the ALP won a majority on 77 seats, and the majority of TEALs has mostly affected the Coalition moderate MPs base attracting middle–class progressive voters on issues like climate change action, feminism, and implementing a national ICAC. The Teals won 6 seats nationwide in 2022, including Zali Steggall, and Helen Haines who held office since 2019. In Brisbane Labor failed to win the seat as the Greens won the seat with Stephen Bates as Labor lost former Labor safe seat Griffith to Max Chandler Mather (a former colleague in the Young Labor Left before switching to the Greens). The LNP also lost its safe seat of Ryan to Elizabeth Watson Brown and the Greens. Labor only won all of its incumbent seats bar 1 loss in Griffith, with most of its gains in NSW, SA, Victoria, and particularly WA. The ALP to date only holds 5 seats in the federal lower house and 3 Senators when compared to the 2007 federal election when Labor last won from opposition when it won 15 seats including 4 seats in the Qld regions (Leichardt, Dawson, Capricornia, and Flynn). These seats failed to come close to Labor in 2022, which could be trouble for Labor at the upcoming 2024 Qld State election if it’s not careful.
Compared to Labor’s first elections in Qld federally it used to be the heartland of federal Labor with both Andrew Fisher and Frank Forde holding seats for a time; Fisher in Wide Bay (1901-1915) and Frank Forde in Capricornia (1922-1946). The Father of Medicare former Whitlam health minister (1972-1975) Dr Doug Everingham also held the Capricornia seat in the 60s, 70s, and early 80s. It had a strong Labor history of 87 years being held by Labor despite being regional in all of federation, with an increased margin of 14.60% towards PHON in the seat [Figure 3 & 4] and regional Queensland voters shying away from Labor to both the LNP, PHON and the KAP on preferences, particularly as Queensland transitions into renewables away from fossil fuels mining and transitions into mining lithium, cobalt, and nickel mining.
The 2022 Federal Election and 2017 and 2020 Qld State Elections which saw the election of Amy MacMahon of South Brisbane against former ALP Deputy Premier Jackie Trad in 2020, along with Michael Berkman in Maiwar in 2017. With the votes towards the Greens increasing particularly in Brisbane City Council wards in 2020 in 6 ward areas such as Walter Taylor, Paddington, Brisbane Central, Coorparoo, Pullenvale, and the Gabba, while the ALP is increasing its margins in 5 wards with its already held 5 Labor wards; namely Calamvale, Bracken Ridge, Enoggera, Jamboree, and Merchant. Hypothetically, if Labor and Greens were to do well in the 2024 City Council elections in Brisbane or beyond it would put the Greens possibly on 6 seats compared to Labor on 9-10 giving both parties a 15-16 majority the first time the progressive side of politics has done so since 2008 since Campbell Newman and the LNP sustained a landslide for well 16 years.
The LNP have adapted to greening Brisbane to hold off the rising surge in progressive voters. But this might not be enough as voters from further south have called SEQ home during the pandemic interstate migrations as well as an increasing younger voting population, and voter disillusionment with the major parties [Figure 2.0]. It may be a hard pill to swallow for Qld Labor, but it may have to negotiate both a preference deal and or coalition administration with the Greens in Brisbane City Council, considering that Brisbane is the largest City Council in Australia and home to 2.6 million people. It outranks the NT, ACT, and Tasmania put together in sheer size of population and administration, with a public service larger than some states and territories. It would follow the same steps Labor had to with the Greens in Tasmania (2010-2014), ACT (2012-present), and New Zealand (2017-present) under both Ardern and Hipkins. To do not do so could be political suicide.
The Greens have become cleverer, grassroots, particularly engaging in unionism among groups like the AUWU and RAFFWU where the SDA has failed members on industrial matters with Fair Work. It also doesn’t help when Qld has been the highest ratio of state Labor branches to refuse membership to new members without disputes tribunal process say and or on grounds of environmentalist pushing more people towards the Greens and Teal campaigns by being more inclusive. Labor too must adapt and change this.
The ALP and the labour movement are far from perfect; they are always evolving and changing. Remember that Labor while envisioning a working men’s paradise at the turn of the 20th century also strongly supported the White Australia policy well into the early 1970s. Although it created public assets for much of the 1910s-1970s, and privatised assets during the Hawke/Keating era like the Commonwealth Bank, Qantas, and QR Rail under Bligh in 2009 during the 2007-2008 GFC. Good and bad decisions are made, and good and bad people can exist in any Labor faction but for Labor to survive into the next century, in this century it must adapt to continue its democratic trend. The nature of the beast in politics is sometimes leaders are both faced with difficult circumstances and need to make difficult decisions as well. Perhaps Labor could also learn from the issues that have made both the Teals and Greens electable in seats in 2019–2022, such as the housing and rental crisis, including dental in Medicare bulk billing, limit overdevelopment in environmentally sensitive areas, limit gas and coal projects in favour of new industries, fight homelessness by initiating similar programs that William Forgan Smith did, support compulsory preferential voting. Considering that Labor only holds several regional councils in Townsville, Rockhampton, and Mt Isa. With most QLD regional City Councils being held by LNP Crs would it be so bad to implement compulsory preferential? It would mean increased Greens Crs, sure! But it would increase Labor candidates’ chances in local races as well as Independents regardless their politics which would be better for democracy.
As democracy is being challenged by extremist and “strong men” taking over the American Republican party under Trump, Putin in Russia, and Xi in China, now is the time for Qld Labor to showcase its democratic credentials and adapt to the times and it might even win more seats on any of the 3 tiers of government.
The 2022 Federal Election Results; House of Representatives ALP = 77 seats Coalition = 58 seats Independents = 10 seats o Teals = 9 seats o CA = 1 seat Greens = 4 seats KAP = 1 seat
Local Labor’s Patrons
Chris Haviland (Admin Committee NSW Labor, public servant, teacher, cricket umpire)
Campbelltown City Council Alderman (1987 – 1993)
Macarthur Federal MP (1993 – 1996)
President of the Bradfield FEC (LEFT faction)
John Faulkner (teacher, research officer, Assistant Secretary NSW ALP: 80 – 89)
Senator for NSW
Minister for Veteran Affairs (1993 – 1994)
Minister for Defence Science and Personnel (1993 – 1994)
Minister for the Environment (1994 – 1996)
Special Minister of State (2007 – 2009)
National President ALP (2007 – 2008)
Vice – President of the Executive Council (2007 – 2010)
Minister for Defence (2009 – 2010)
Father of the Australian Senate (2014 – 2015) (LEFT faction)
Janelle Anne Saffin (teacher, lawyer)
NSW Legislative Council (1995 – 2003)
Page Federal MP (2007 – 2013)
NSW Lismore State MP (2019 – Present)
Andrew Leigh (lawyer, academic author, professor at ANU)
Fraser Federal MP (2010 – 2016)
Fenner Federal MP (2016 – Present)
Parliamentary Secretary to Julia Gillard PM (2013)
Assistant Minister for Competition, Charities, and Treasury (2022 – Present) (RIGHT faction)
Fiona Richardson (political advisor) (passed away in 2017) (RIGHT faction)
Victoria Legislative Assembly (2006 – 2017)
Parliamentary Secretary for Education (2007)
Parliamentary Secretary for Treasury and Finance (2007)
Minister for Women and Prevention of Family Violence (2014
Oversaw the Victorian Royal Commission into Family Violence in 2015
Curtis Pitt (public servant) (MODERATE RIGHT faction aligned with LEFT in QLD)
QLD State MP Mulgrave (2009 – Present)
Minister for Disabilities, Mental Health, ATIS Partnership(s) (2011 – 2012)
Treasurer of QLD (2015 – 2017)
Minister for Sport, Employment, Industrial Relations, ATSI Partnership(s) (2015 – 2017)
Speaker of QLD Parliament (2018 – Present)
Denise Allen (beauty therapist, modelling agency, retail business owner) (passed away in 2022)
State MP for Benalla (Victoria) (2000 – 2002)
Join us in Local Labor Qld if you would like to campaign in Local Labor Qld to advocate for compulsory preferential voting reform in QLD, social justice issues, and more democratic say in Labor for members! Contact me via M: 0450 359 863.
Contact Chris Haviland, or Nicole Campbell for INFO about NSW Local Labor (or) Janet McCalman or Eric Dearricott via the Open Labor Victoria website. Openlabor.net.au.
Extra Resources
1 Troy Bramston is senior writer and columnist with The Australian since 2011. He is also a contributor to Sky News and a former speech writer in the Rudd Government. This book analyses the need for reform in the ALP after the 2010 federal election hung parliament.
Dyrenfurth, N. Bongiorno, F. (2011). A Little History of the Australian Labor Party. University of New South Wales Press.
Giuliano, C. (2022). Voting Patterns to major parties by generation. Australian Parliament. <https://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Parliamentary_Library/FlagPost/2022/April/Voting_patterns_by_generation> accessed 05/03/2023.
Yarrow, Susan (2015). Split, intervention, renewal: the ALP in Queensland 1957 – 1989. MPhil Thesis, School of Historical and Philosophical Inquiry, The University of Queensland.
Callen Sorensen Karklis, Bachelor of Government and International Relations.
Callen is a Quandamooka Nunukul Aboriginal person from North Stradbroke Island. He has been the Secretary of the Qld Fabians in 2018, and the Assistant Secretary 2018 – 2019, 2016, and was more recently the Policy and Publications Officer 2020 – 2021. Callen previously was in Labor branch executives in the Oodgeroo (Cleveland areas), SEC and the Bowman FEC. He has also worked for Cr Peter Cumming, worked in market research, trade unions, media advertising, and worked in retail. He also ran for Redland City Council in 2020 on protecting the Toondah Ramsar wetlands. Callen is active in Redlands 2030, Labor LEAN, the Redlands Museum, and his local sports club at Victoria Pt Sharks Club. Callen also has a Diploma of Business and attained his tertiary education from Griffith University. He was a co-host from time to time on Workers Power 4ZZZ (FM 102.1) on Tuesday morning’s program Workers Power. He currently works as a public servant in Qld and the Secretary for Qld Local Labor.
Like what we do at The AIMN?
You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.
Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!
Your contribution to help with the running costs of this site will be greatly appreciated.
You can donate through PayPal or credit card via the button below, or donate via bank transfer: BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969