New report finds Australian wind tower manufacturing would…

The Australia Institute Media Release Australia could create more than 4300 quality direct…

Senate Splits On International Education Bill

Independent Tertiary Education Council Australia (ITECA) Media Release Independent skills training and higher…

Queensland Futures: Can More Critical and Comprehensive News…

By Denis Bright With the Queensland Government now in caretaker mode, time is…

Urgent expansion of services needed for people with…

Homelessness Australia Media Release October 10 2024 is World Homelessness Day and World…

Information, misinformation and blatant lies

By Bert Hetebry Does truth matter? How is truth discerned? Or more importantly what is…

LNP Government in Queensland: Dangers of Electing Them

By Denis Hay Description Explore the dangers of electing an LNP government in Queensland…

In Liz We Truss!

There's a bit of a tall poppy syndrome in Australia where we…

Migration, Pathway to Nation Building report released by…

Parliament of Australia Media Release The Joint Standing Committee on Migration today released the Migration, Pathway…

«
»
Facebook

I beg to differ… but I might not

I remain conflicted. Which might be a good or a bad thing. Or perhaps neither.

Others have attempted to muse philosophically in the open press. It usually results in a communications train wreck. The reader is not happy. The author doesn’t really say what they wanted to say. An editor confronts a barren comments section. Everyone remains unsatisfied.

But, sometimes the frustration fair boils over. I just want to scream loudly, existentially, and utterly inarticulately, in the ear of every media commentator and journalist in the country that ‘fuck fuck fuck nuance and fuck!!!!!!’

But the problem is with me, not the press. To blame the press for my own personal dissatisfactions regarding the state of the current media discourse would be stupid and futile.

So, I am confronted with a philosophical dilemma. Which is the worst sort of thing to ever try and write about. Because my philosophical dilemma might very well be your philosophical dilemma, most reasonable and well-adjusted people will stop reading right about now. After all, nobody sane needs to go looking for brand-new things to worry about.

(Still there?)

You see, like you, I don’t expect much of any given part of the modern media. However, when we abandoned sharing an anticipation of there being such a thing as a ‘mainstream media’ environment, it seems that we also swam out into new and dangerous waters, filled with a range of largely uncharted shoals and narrows – and there doesn’t seem to be any clear boundaries in sight?

In this new mediascape, while the talking heads commonly use words and tell stories that are readily recognisable, in the main they generally seem to be talking about a (one or another) world that none of us actually inhabit. But then you and I (apparently) don’t mind too much. After all, just like you, I am now a ridiculously sophisticated, post-modern, multi-media, audience member. (And we are all uniquely hard-etched against the modern skyline; articulate, intelligent, sophisticated media consumers, one and all.)

So, just like you, I apply a critical analytical lens to every utterance I encounter. First, I dissect it with heartless logical precision, then I nibble upon only those particular parts of the carcass that I find personally appealing. Moreover, it is therefore accepted that the media personalities and systems that interlink to create our modern media utopia all recognise that the consumer is now king. Consequently, they all happily narrowcast their thousand-and- one weird but pleasing (and mostly wrong) ideas – and it is now up to us -the audience – to be discerning and sort it all out.

I am not suggesting that it is possible or preferable to aspire to returning to some mythical past where the press was ‘objective’ but I am pointing out that we have sort of thrown the baby, the bathwater, and the entire bath, out the window. I just looked out the porthole people: it appears we are now flying at an unknown altitude, over unfamiliar territory, with no one in charge. I am not saying that I am not currently quite comfortable but… (dilemma).

Of course, we all desire a wonderfully black and white world. It is human nature to demand elegantly simple answers. Religion was our first and worst attempt at simplifying everything. Then came the theatre, politics, fan-fiction, a stock exchange, and finally the quaint idea of an objective press who are reporting on the ‘news’. These are all elegantly wrought systems that serve to simplify chaos by inventing understandable urgencies, desires and answers. They serve as ways of simplifying and rendering a dangerously changeable universe into understandable and compelling narratives that all variously help us as we make our way to work on a train.

Additionally, I love our full-blown-modern-multi-media-paradise.TM I long for a mythical past where there was colour in the reporting and people acknowledged their own our corporate limitations. Yet I also know that there never was such a time. I was simpler once, not the past. And on the net a presenter has to stand out. A simple message, advanced forcefully, is essential. Doubt is a downer. Indecision is weakness. Equivocation is ill-informed. Ignorance is unappealing. So in this new snap-chat world I feel sometimes that I am drowning in black and white. But my relief valve then lets out an existential scream (see above) and then I feel marginally better. It solves little but does clarify exactly how utterly stuffed we are, collectively, and also how futile and silly it is to even embark on trying to write an article like this one.

… (time and coffee)

Nevertheless, I am stuck.

I am a post-modern cool-guy with a post-apocalyptic preset. I get ‘it’. Fuck: I helped jointly create ‘it’.

But as a discerning consumer I am also getting bloody tired. I have no right to whinge about a desire to go back to some woolly conception of a mainstream press or express a whimsical desire to inhabit a world where we can all agree on a basic set of facts and what is important. The place ever existed. I was once simpler: the world has always been chaotic and ridiculously complicated. Get over it.

BUT, with all that being said… What about a bit of care and self-doubt? How about a bit of not knowing things? What about dissipating the illusion that there are always simple answers, or good or viable answers? I sometimes long for a press where authors sometimes – just sometimes – frame a question and then admit that it has them stumped; that there seems to be no viable answer in sight.

In our brand-new multi-media paradise, the media narratives still generally continue to be all about recognisable goodies and baddies, all doing recognisably good and bad things. With most stories a simplistic layering of opposing ‘good’ and ‘bad’ narratives. Trump good or Trump bad. Israel good or Israel bad. Right good, left good, radical bad, conservative bad. Etc. Progressive, liberal religious capitalistic… Pick your cause or demographic.

Simplistic contrasts and emphatic statements seem to be everywhere. And everyone is ever urging me to ‘take a stand’ and make my voice heard. But I remain conflicted.

It just ain’t that black and white.

And I got nothing new to offer.

Except maybe to scream into the void every now and again.

(And no, it doesn’t make me feel better. Nor should it. This is philosophy, not journalism.)

I did warn you this was going nowhere. I might go get coffee…

 

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

Donate Button

America: Exactly how we remembered it

‘Mum & Dad just got home… ’

Aussies can be forgiven for failing to appreciate exactly how and why Harris and Walz have had such a massive and immediate impact.

The psyche of Aussies and Yanks is similar yet different. A difference that is well reflected in the sorts of people who run for president and the way that they commonly present themselves. Or it has been up until Clinton v Trump.

Prior to the arrival of Trump, American Presidents were not just a political figure. For all of the modern era (until recently) the US president was expected to not only act as the head of state but also act as the defacto daddy for the country. Their family was considered by most to be a living, breathing example for how a good wholesome traditional American family should behave.

This is why the President and his family would enact their Christmas, Easter and other celebrations in a very public and orchestrated fashion. Where Aussies commonly see this as being cheesy, Americans lap it up. It talks to both their love of country and their common mythology in a way that is largely opaque to the rest of us. When they look at their First Family smiling for the cameras it evokes an appreciation that Mummy and Daddy are in the White House, the fire is burning in the hearth, the garden is well tended, the table set, the great republic continues to dominate the world, so we can all kick back and relax.

The covid crisis caused all sorts of emotional and financial problems and many, many deaths. But Americans are harder than us pussies in Aus. They are used to a dog-eat-dog society. Guns are everywhere. Gun deaths are common. War is an accepted and eternal part of the American way of life. So, the real gut punch to the American psyche that has been inflicted by the recent years of political and social argy-bargy has little to do with covid, or political unrest, or January 6, or even the overturning of Roe. American politics went off the rails for two presidential terms simply because their political leaders veered wildly off-script.

Both Hillary and Bill Clinton lost because Bill couldn’t keep it in his pants. Slick Willy Clinton commenced his incumbency as an overtly traditional family man – as with every other presidential hopeful before him. And for him as with all before him, the test for a President was as much a moral as a policy challenge. This is because the job of being the national American Daddy has always been considered as one that can be filled by only the most moral and ‘normal’ sorts of people. (People who don’t strap dogs to the top of cars when they go on holidays. Or keep a mistress. Or order criminals to burgle an office.)

So, when Hillary fronted to try and ‘crack the glass ceiling’, while there is no doubt that the American public were ready for a woman to be President, they were not ready to elect a ‘failed wife’. When you look at the figures, Trump beat Hillary on the votes of the suburban women of America. Trump was a strong virile man while Hillary was somehow insufficient. Her Daddy was playing the field. And fractured marriage would simply not work…

Then suddenly the real Trump appeared out of the haze of the election and the American political argument was suddenly ungrounded. Where once the excesses of the executive were restrained by the requirement to model a perfect family for the rest of the country, Trump decided that all of this was hoo-ha and could be dispensed with. Slavishly, the conservative media followed him. But the rest of the American polity and press were suddenly caught flat-footed.

The Republicans had unilaterally declared that the rules had changed. They were all now stating and constantly reiterating the proposition that the ends do justify the means. That a President need not be a ‘good guy’ at all. As long as he was strong and ‘one of us’.

And so we arrive where we are today. President Biden won because he resembled a good helpful grand-dad, not because anyone cared a jot about what he believed. By the time that the last election had arrived, that huge group of middle America who do not really pay much attention to politics were dead sick of twenty-four-hour Trump. His cult was as strong as ever, the Dems were still in disarray, but middle America turned against him. Not his policies but rather his chaos. The country decided Grandad Biden would do because he was a recognizable person.

Yet this still left the American Presidency detached from the traditional ethos of the leadership. Then when Joe started faltering, it so hurt the soul of middle America because they were watching their national GranDaddy failing. The charge that Joe is too old for the Presidency bit so deep and bled so readily simply because every person watching could empathize with the charge. We have all watched people we love being slowly reduced as they age.

Then suddenly, the events of the last few weeks seem to have caused a lot of middle America to once again engage with their political traditions and mythologies. This sudden and massive re-engagement has occurred simply because they have once again been provided with a model of a loving family to emulate and empathize with. The Stories being told in the convention are recognizable and uplifting. The candidate loves her husband and he loves her dearly. They both smile a lot. Everyone is happy.

In simple terms, America has so rapidly reacted to the arrival of Harris and Walz simply because they appreciate it as a return to tradition. A return to something that is immediately recognizable. Normality has once again started to reassert itself.

I have the popcorn out and I am huddled on the couch. For the last few outings I was really confused. Nothing about the unfolding drama was recognizable. Odd things were happening, for reasons that were unclear, all over the shop. But this time – along with millions of Yanks – I am really enjoying the show.

Right now, it looks like Mommy and Daddy are preparing to move back into the White House, and everyone is smiling, but this plot is moving quickly. I may have to duck out for more snacks…

Cool bananas

 

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

Donate Button

All Hail Our Glorious Leader: Rupert Murdoch

The people of Australia have rejected the divisive ideas of the right to the point that the only jurisdiction that retains a right-wing government in Australia is the smallest state in the land – and even in Tas this grip on power is waning. Yet even though the right-wing political parties in our country have been rejected by the population, they still run the country. The outcome of the Voice referendum concretely demonstrates that our country is currently being run from overseas, as a wholly owned subsidiary of NewsCorp. It illustrates starkly that the mainstream press in Australia is the actual right-wing opposition, not the LNP.

Consider that only ten months ago we were on the verge of being in solid agreement regarding the Voice to parliament. Eighty per cent of Aussies were agreed that it was a necessary measure to assist in aiding Aboriginal empowerment. But then NewsCorp decided it was not in their interests, so they decided the referendum would fail. Bad luck, Aussies.

Foreign commentators often voice their amazement that in Australia we have decided to allow an American citizen to not just own a media organisation, but rather own more than half of the entire media landscape in the entire land. But these critics generally happen to live in countries where there is an actually free press. Whereas, in Australia, we only get told what Rupert wants us to know, so we only get angry about the things that Rupert wants us to be angry about. So, these are matters that are simply never canvassed in our mainstream press.

Which brings me to the nub of this missive. Perhaps the failure of the Voice may be a tipping point? Perhaps it will bring to the fore some discussion regarding our incredibly debased media environment. Maybe – just maybe – the right-wing corporate media has over-played its hand this time?

In my eyes, the only potential silver-lining to this sorry story is that Aussies do not like to be conned. And in the days and weeks ahead a great many of those who voted ‘no’ to the referendum question will certainly realise that they have been sold a pack of bullshit by the corporate media. And not just one or two lies. It will soon become blindingly obvious to even blind-Freddy that the mainstream press in Australia has been spewing forth a veritable blizzard of utter bullshit for months.

The whoppers we have been told include that:

  • Yes campaigners are racists.
  • the Aboriginal population are just like all other Aussies.
  • the referendum was a plot to entrench Aboriginal privilege.
  • the Voice was a purely political proposition.
  • the Voice would create a two-tier system.
  • the Voice was created by the Labor Party.
  • the Voice was created by the PM.
  • the Voice would cause an eternal legal nightmare where every action of the government would have to be debated in the High Court
  • the Voice would allow our Aboriginal overlords to hold the country to ransom by blocking every proposed development (even the building of a backyard dunny).
  • the Uluru Declaration is actually a 26-page communist/socialist/fascist plot to force a treaty upon us all (that would grant the Aboriginal portion of our population the right to rule over everyone else).
  • Australia has always been good and kind to our first nations people.
  • welcome to country ceremonies are actually a declaration of exclusive ownership.
  • the Voice referendum was a declaration of war.
  • the LNP were always against the idea.
  • the Yes campaign was intent on dividing Australia by race.
  • the first nations people in our land do not need assistance, and
  • the assistance currently being provided is far too generous.

Etc etc etc etc etc etc.

So we were fed lie, after lie, after lie. The zone was flooded with bullshit’.

But I suggest it is going to be very difficult for these same mainstream press agencies to maintain this heightened level of deceit for very long. I think the failure of the referendum will prompt an awful lot of Aussies to ask why we continue to allow a far right-wing, foreign-owned corporation, to run our entire political agenda.

Perhaps it is just an optimistic dream, but surely these events will illustrate for a large segment of our population that Rupert Murdoch simply does not have the best interests of Australia at heart. That NewsCorp has been knowingly and deliberately stirring up hatred and dissention for commercial gain. That NewsCorp has been steadily and relentlessly importing into Australia all the same bullshit that has so scarred the American political scene for more than twenty years.

Perhaps the failure of this referendum will cause a growing percentage of the population to ask out loud why it is that after NewsCorp has been demonstrated in a US court room to be a knowing progenitor of lies and deceit, this organisation is still considered by our federal authorities to be morally and ethically fit to own and run most of our commercial media?

Perhaps more people will begin to ask why NewsCorp continues to enjoy special dispensations (from the medial laws regarding monopolistic practices) that Aussie corporations do not enjoy?

I feel that it is way beyond time that the NewsCorp family and their divisive and quite repulsive ideas were expelled from our country. This large right-wing monopoly was allowed to develop because successive Aussie governments were sold the falsehood that in the developing digital environment the only way to avoid the complete shutting down of large parts of the media was to allow the big players to get bigger. So, what has been the result? The big players gobbled up all of the small ones and then shut them down. As a result, we have allowed two huge right wing corporate monoliths to grow and devour the entire media sector. So, Australia now has the most centralised media environment in the entire world. Even fascist states gaze upon our media environment with envy.

It is way past time that we collectively informed our right-wing press agencies that they cannot continue to blatantly lie and not be held to account. That they cannot dictate to everyone in Aus what can and cannot be debated, and the tone of the debate. But I am not holding my breath. Fr’chrissakes, our cowardly Federal Labor government has simply sold their collective souls to Rupert and act like a pack of lapdogs. It makes me ashamed to be an Aussie.

Alternatively, we can just give up on this charade. We can simply install Mr Murdoch as our fascist overlord. It would certainly save a lot of time and money currently being wasted on pretending we live in a democracy.

Most of the world now looks on us as being a country full of unreconstructed racists. It is hard to disagree with this assessment. Thanks, Rupert and NewsCorp. Thank you Channel Nine. Thank you, Sky News. I am sure that in these newsrooms they will be partying late into the night. It’s hard to blame them. After all, they have once again demonstrated exactly who is running the country. All Hail Our Glorious Leader: Rupert Murdoch.

(Poor fellow my country.)

 

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

Donate Button

I’m an angry bigot, in a tiny country town

My first love is satire and comedy – I used to run Radio Mango Productions in Mackay many moons ago and we wrote and recorded comedy skits for radio (Postcards from the Edge, In a Workplace Near U, etc).

I normally just post the incidental stuff on my FB page, but every now and again I get topical.

This one has been shared an awful lot so I thought I’d show it to you. (And I really would like to see it recorded.)

 

I’m an angry bigot, in a tiny country town

(A Country & Western Song)

 

When I’m feeling out of it

confused and kinda down

when internally its raining

and the world, it wears a frown

then I take it out on everyone

and try to bring them down

I’m an angry bigot

In a tiny country town

 

(chorus – backing singers)

Yes, he’s an angry bigot

In a tiny country town

(single backing singer)

And he’ll never let,

you forget

He’s there to bring you down

(chorus – backing singers)

He’ll never let,

you forget

He’s there to bring you down

 

Throughout a really crappy day

and a crappy night

I’ve just insulting things to say

while I try and pick a fight

and if you ever question me

or dare to contradict

I’ll make your life a misery

As I revel in conflict

 

(chorus)

Yes, he’s an angry bigot

In a tiny country town

And he’ll never let,

you forget

He’s there to bring you down

He’ll never let,

you forget

He’s there to bring you down

 

I rail about the communists

and greenie volunteers

About poofters, fags, and feminists

Gays and screaming queers

Tree-hugging bloody socialists

Bullshit climate fears

and all those leaching unionists

and bullshit liberal tears

 

(chorus)

Yes, he’s an angry bigot

In a tiny country town

And he’ll never let, you forget

He’s there to bring you down

He’ll never let, you forget

He’s there to bring you down.

 

(Copyright Reserved, Genitals Unrestrained, 2023)

 

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

Donate Button

Cannabis: We can shut up, toe the line, be vilified, or not be reported at all

When President Obama commented that he thought cannabis was likely less dangerous than alcohol it generated headlines around the world. Why?

Cannabis is a relatively harmless therapeutic and recreational drug. It has been studied more exhaustively than any other therapeutic substance on earth. In recorded history there is not a single documented case of a person dying from cannabis toxicity. Last year, in Australia, there were no deaths attributed primarily to the use of cannabis. In 2014, the year that Obama publicly observed that cannabis is likely less dangerous than alcohol, there had been no deaths solely attributable to cannabis use in the US, or Australia, or the known universe.

In Australia, in 2014, there were more than five-and-a-half-thousand deaths caused directly by excess alcohol consumption. There were at least one-hundred-and-sixty-thousand hospitalizations directly attributed to abusing alcohol. Moreover, we are all aware that this is the case. Even if we do not know the precise death and injury toll, most everyone in our modern western society, regardless of their personal position or individual opinion, lives in an environment where there are alcoholic vagrants on the street. It is a sad fact of life. But there are no ‘cannabis vagrants’. In fact, such a proposition seems more than a tad silly.

In this manner, the personal experience of all the inhabitants of the western world is that cannabis is a relatively harmless therapeutic herb and recreational drug. Which makes it illuminating to consider precisely why President Obama’s comments were considered newsworthy.

President Obama spoke a simple truth that publicly contradicted ‘the big lie’. Which is that cannabis must always be typified as a ‘dangerous’ drug. The observation was considered newsworthy because it fails to adhere to one of the principal rules regarding talking about cannabis. A rule that is policed by all the right-wing media guardians, as well as the supine ‘progressive’ media outlets.

The rule that Obama broke was that cannabis must not be compared and contrasted with any other substance. It must be discussed in absolute and isolated terms. ‘CANNABIS IS DANGEROUS’ the right wing declare, and the perfectly pliant mainstream simply agree. (After all, everything and anything can be dangerous.) Medicinal cannabis (of course) is acceptable, but only because it is strictly regulated. Because big penalties apply to protect the Australian public against the scourge of cannabis being freely available, it is acceptable.

Yet journalists do not ask ‘why’ we are being protected, or from what particular harms. They removed all penalties attaching to cannabis in Thailand and the place seems to be booming, and despite searching high and low for any sort of a harm attaching to this free availability of cannabis, even the police and magistrates that I asked were unable to identify any particular harm.

Journalists also fail to ask why we aren’t being protected from even more dangerous things in a similar fashion? The discussion of cannabis and the potential harms that attach to its use never seem to contextualise the discussion by noting that fifty people die from a deliberate overdose of paracetamol each year in this country (and at least three times that number are hospitalized). Nor do they observe that even if cannabis was freely available – in huge piles in the street – it would not lead to the death of anyone as it is impossible to kill yourself by overdosing on cannabis. Unlike almost every other therapeutic substance (and many commonly available foodstuffs) cannabis is entirely non-toxic.

But even more startling, this ignorance also extends to all substances that have been deemed illegal by the authorities, regardless of its danger or actual toxicity. Cannabis is equated with methamphetamine and other dangerous illegal narcotics – even though nobody dies from the abuse of cannabis. Yet the largely mythical harms associated with cannabis are never equated with the toll directly levied on society by the abuse of alcohol. Even when considering actually dangerous illicit substances these comparisons are largely avoided, as they serve to illustrate that the current war on drugs is not just utterly illogical and irrational, it is utterly nonsensical.

Consider that in 2011, at the height of the amphetamine boom in Australia, there were one hundred and one methamphetamine related fatalities, every one of which was widely reported. Yet when the statistics are closely and impartially considered, during the whole of amphetamine craze there were at least fifty-five fatalities associated directly with the abuse of alcohol for every one death due to amphetamine overdose. Also consider that in 2011 almost twice as many people died from either a deliberate overdose or the incidental abuse of paracetamol as died from amphetamine abuse. So, in summary, in 2011, in Australia, there was one death from the abuse of methamphetamine for every fifty-five deaths from abusing alcohol, many more people died as a direct result of abusing paracetamol than died from abusing ‘ice’, and still nobody died from using cannabis.

Yet the sad sting in this tail is that Obama was misquoted. One sentence from this interview was lifted and used to depict President Obama as being ‘soft on drugs’. When the actual interview is considered in its entirety then it is obvious that Obama is actually doing his best to hew to the corporate line. He describes cannabis use as ‘bad habit and a vice, not very different from the cigarettes that I smoked as a young person up through a big chunk of my adult life,’ before going on to add (seemingly accidentally and unthinkingly) that ‘I don’t think it is more dangerous than alcohol’.

Yet as soon as he notes that he is on thin ice, Obama at once slides back to addressing the topic as a civil rights matter, and turns to discussing the disproportionate numbers of black and Latino arrests for pot, and noting that ‘middle-class kids don’t get locked up for smoking pot, and poor kids do’. Which all serves to underline the totalitarian nature of the ‘dangerous drug’ media narrative. Even the coolest President of the US has to toe this corporate media line. Even the President of the US is well aware that he has to be ‘careful’ when discussing these matters. If a politician accidentally says anything that is remotely truthful – they are toast. Every mainstream media outlet in the known universe will instantly label them as ‘soft on drugs’. Every politician knows that this is the case.

Thus, in Australia, cannabis will always be described as a dangerous drug. Full stop. It is a firm rule. If you want to say different (even if you are a politician) you can’t. Cannabis is dangerous and must not be compared and contrasted with any other substance. Full stop.

We have a ‘free press’ in this country. We are all free to shut up, toe the line, be vilified, or not be reported.

Have a nice day.

 

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

Donate Button

Fascism is unlikely: idiocy is the real threat

The fight against domestic fascism is as American as apple pie. Even though much of the modern mythology of the western world celebrates the USA as a bastion of democracy, providing a steady and unalloyed example of democratic virtue for the rest of the world, this is misleading. It ignores the actual history of the land.

Back in the real world The People of the State of New York v. Donald J. Trump is certainly not the first case in which the forces of niceness in America have moved to prosecute a bunch of runaway fascists, and it is unlikely to be the last. So, it is comforting to note that while Trump and his clowncar full of fascists do garner an awful lot of attention, they are also incredibly incompetent. Whereas the last time a coup attempt by a bunch of fascists was thwarted by the Justice Department it involved a plot being overseen by competent individuals who were all acting in accord with a potentially viable and well thought out plan.

In the 1930s American Fascism was on a roll. It must be remembered that until the entry of the US into WWII, in December of 1941, the idea of fascism was perfectly respectable in the US. Great swathes of the American population were avid followers of political activists who were avowed and self-professed fascists.

At this time the polarisation of Europe was echoed by a domestic polarisation within the USA. The large and growing domestic socialist movement in the USA, that had existed prior to WWI, had been the target of a concerted domestic backlash both during and following the war, with groups such as the American Defense Society in concert with many federal government authorities leading the charge. A similar polarisation was evident inside the workers organisations in the US, with the revolution in Russia forcing a schism between more moderate forces and the radical Leninists.

All of this context is mentioned so as to stress that up until the commencement of WWII, the idea of fascism in the US was perfectly respectable. Not like being a nasty un-American commie, or a Unionist. Fascism was popular. It was a growing trend.

Throughout the late 1930s radical demagogues such as Father Coughlin were drawing huge radio audiences. This Hitler loving cleric talked directly to more than thirty million listeners every week, preaching an anti-Semitic, antidemocratic, racist ideology to a growing and ever more radicalised listenership. As Mark Twain has observed, while history might not repeat itself, it often rhymes. So, at this point it is helpful to once again broaden our focus to include Trump and his clowncar. This is because, regardless of the epoch, American fascism – as with fascism everywhere – always remains much the same. It hums an ‘us and them’ song. A populist, ultranationalist, ditty that preaches the need to return to the values of a glorious past – a far greater and more glorious past. An utterly mythical past. But the focus is always on the unpatriotic hordes.

The targets change but the song remains the same. Coughlin was anti-Jew, anti-Black, anti-Labor, anti-atheist. He sympathised with strong man regimes around the world. He quite deliberatively provoked hatred for those he deemed to be un-American. He praised Hitler, urged his followers to get involved in politics at every level, and demanded that they strive to rid the American political system of Jewish, Socialist, Communist, and Atheist sympathisers. By the late 1930s Coughlin led a broad populist movement that was spread right across the USA.

The targets change but the song remains the same. Trump rants that gay transgender druggie leftists are stealing America. That black criminals are stealing America. That refugees are stealing America. That welfare queens, unionists, students, feminists, the entertainment industry, Silicon Valley, teachers, fully stocked libraries, RINOS and Democrats – and the rest of ‘them’ – are all engaged in stealing America. As with all fascists, the list of those who are patently unpatriotic is endless.

Father Coughlins’ fascistic dreams culminated in 1939. In February the American Nazi’s held a rally at Madison Square Garden that was attended by more than 20,000 supporters. This caused the Attorney for the Southern District of New York to become concerned. His office publicly petitioned the Feds to take action. In response, in December of the same year, the FBI raided the offices of the Christian Front and so famously thwarted a well-funded, carefully organised and more than adequately armed insurrection plot, just two weeks away from launching a full-blown coup to take over the government of the USA.

Following the raid seventeen people were indicted. They were charged with conspiring ‘to overthrow, put down and destroy by force the Government of the United States and by force to take its property’, as well as the theft and stockpiling of ‘Federal munitions and property’. Then history intervened.

Late in 1941 the USA entered the war against Germany, and as the Naz’s were allied with the fascists, the fight against ‘fascism’ was a now national security priority. At once the national mood changed. Fascism was instantly uncool. The charges against all the Christian Front operatives were vacated in the first year of the war. It was deemed to be against the public interest to engage in a lengthy and somewhat embarrassing trial during wartime, especially as there were bigger fish to fry. The domestic fascist threat was suddenly a thing of the past.

Yet even though the Trumpian hordes sing a fascistic song, and his followers dance a fascistic jib, which is all directly comparable to that which was celebrated by millions during the 1930s in the USA, most media outlets in the land still refuse to label it ‘fascistic’. Or acknowledge we have seen it all before. Which is entirely understandable for those outlets that have declared a partisan political allegiance, but not the rest. Or the major political parties.

I feel this is largely down to category confusion. Many are critical of Trump but are nevertheless confused regarding what they are seeing occur. They are careful to avoid calling it a ‘fascist’ movement as they mistake this as being a reference to a political movement or idea. Which is simply a failure in comprehension more than anything. Fascism is expressed politically but it is not at all about politics. Fascism is all about populism and raw power, it is always both anti and non-political.

Which is to say, fascistic movements everywhere in the world have always derived their strength and support from drawing from all sides of an existing political spectrum. But more significantly, they are populist movements that serve to mobilise a large proportion of otherwise politically unengaged citizens. Consequently, one of the defining characteristics of both the movement in the 1930s, and the Trumpian horde, is that a large proportion of these people were previously politically unengaged and unaffiliated. These are voters who are largely new to any sort of political discourse or action and who commonly profess to be largely disaffected with all sides of the political process prior to their becoming fascistic supporters. Thus, these are people who are seeking a different message and solution to those that are being considered and offered by mainstream political parties. In simple terms, a fascistic movement is always characterised by simple, dangerously fantastical, ideas. The propositions of a mythical past might differ (be it a glorious Roman or American Republic), but the systemic denigration of minority groups remains the same. The targets change but the song remains the same.

Therefore, the principal threat that is posed by the rise of a fascistic dialogue (as is perfectly illustrated by the MAGA movement), is generally missed. It is unlikely that the fascists will take outright power. Yet the concerns and arguments that are pedalled by the fascists nevertheless do take a terrible toll on our social life and governmental institutions. This is because fascism is not politics, it is organised hating. Fascism is an ideology that hinges on the identification and civic defenestration of mythical enemies. It is undemocratic, but to dismiss it as being ‘unpatriotic’ simply leads to an ever more determined failure to focus on the imaginary world of American nationalism and the need to be careful and considered in our political speech. It only serves to further blur the line between mythic representations and reality. When we entertain or respond to ‘culture war’ idiocy in our media, policy discussion is thus slowly abandoned. It is far less interesting. It catches fewer eyeballs than any good culture war fight.

Thus, seamlessly and slowly, the possibility for any sort of rational and coherent policy discussion is largely obviated. Idiot propositions are normalised. All that is left in the commercial ‘mainstream’ is the proposition of nonsense and the countering of the nonsense; an ongoing, ever-expanding and ever more nonsensical culture war. Thus, in my opinion, the biggest threat from fascism in the modern age is that it serves to debase our pollical discourse. The real threat from the Trumpian discourse is not that a fascist government in the USA is a likely prospect. The real threat is the normalisation of idiocy.

The biggest threat is to allow people to spout overtly fascistic idiocy and false information in public, without this drawing hoots of derision and guffaws of astonished laughter. Without these idiots being laughed off the stage. The real threat is that large swathes of our media now actively indulge in fostering an ‘us and them’ fascistic worldview, where cultural uniformity and traditions, in accord with a (mythical) glorious past, are always privileged, regardless of the topic under consideration and usually instead of the topic under consideration.

In such a manner, fascistic thinking is caustic. It rots the brain by privileging the basest tribal instincts. A lot of time can be saved by simply identifying the one small segment of the American population that is ignored by the fascists. When considered from this vantage, it is very soon obvious that the only ‘real Americans’ in the USA – according to both Father Coughlin and Trump – are white, affluent, Christian and heterosexual. It is simple bigotry and runs counter to the intent of the founders of the American Republic and the plain text of the American constitution.

The battle is against the celebration and retailing of idiocy and bigotry. Not Trump. There are commercial forces in the media that have decided that they will dictate that the political dialogue of the whole world will be either Trumpian nonsense or the refutation of Trumpian nonsense, as this averts all eyes from much needed media and monopoly law reform, and for as long as we are thus engaged in arguing about nonsense, we suffer the crazy status quo.

So, while I expect that in the next few months we will see the long-awaited implosion of the current fascistic movement in the US, in much the same manner as it dissipated very quickly last time around, I suggest that it will take a very long time to repair the damage done to our media and political discourse. Which requires that we all refocus our attention on all of the boring yet actually consequential topics that the current political discourse seems to ruthlessly avoid.

(Funny thing that. Have a nice day.)

 

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

Donate Button

Coming Soon to a Screen in your Area: The Danger of Political Fairytales

We are constantly learning about yet another mass shooting in the US. However, these tragic events have recently been occurring with such rapidity it can be difficult to keep track. As a result, Aussies have largely stopped paying much attention.

But I am not implying this is callous – or even unusual. Precisely the reverse. It is an entirely understandable reaction. We are all constantly watching ‘goodies’ and ‘baddies’ waving guns about on our tele, so it is disturbingly easy to push all of these ‘stories’ about mass shootings and the proliferation of guns into this same frame of reference. I do it all the time.

I read an awful lot of American newspapers. Yet even so, I normally just ‘blip’ over the many local ‘crime’ stories about gun crime and mass shootings as they are simply too disheartening. But sometimes, when the debate regarding the regulation of firearms bleeds into the political press and election coverage, it becomes a little difficult to ignore the topic. Hence this article.

But I am not writing about gun crime in the US per se. The ultimate aim of this short muse is to consider how discussion of this matter – as well as many others – has now drifted into the realm of the absurd, and why and how this is dangerous. But one thing at a time.

This is initially a story about the new emergency order that the Democratic Governor of New Mexico, Michelle Lujan Grisham, recently issued. An emergency health-order that suspends the right to carry firearms in public, in and around Albuquerque, which is the state’s largest city.

The Governor explained that she had issued the order in response to a recent spate of shootings, including a suspected road rage incident outside a minor league baseball stadium that killed an 11-year-old girl standing on the sidewalk and critically wounded another in a vehicle; a 5-year-old girl fatally shot as she slept in a motor home; and the murder of a13-year-old girl, by a14-year-old boy, with his father’s gun.

Before considering the response to the issuance of this order, it is helpful to closely examine the claims being made by the Governor. Certainly, these tragic murders are horrific. But does the current situation warrant such an intervention? I went looking for a bit of context.

Albuquerque is not a large city, especially by American standards. With a population of about six hundred thousand it is comparable in size to Newcastle (if you add the Maitland district). Also, while Albuquerque is a more dangerous place to live than is commonplace in the USA, the same is also true for Newcastle. Over the last two years, Newcastle has generated a murder rate that is five times the average for the rest of NSW. In total, there were five murders in the Newcastle district in 2021, while in the preceding year there were four.

These statistics have generated concern but nevertheless, Australians are not generally too worried about getting shot. Even those living in Newcastle. And when the stats are interrogated, this seems a perfectly rational response. The total number of murders in Australia has been in the range of 300 to 350 per year (for the whole country) for the last two decades, with guns being involved in only about 21% of these homicide incidents.

Then there is the situation in the similarly sized city of Albuquerque. In recent years there has been a recent surge in homicides all across the USA. While arrests for most forms of criminal activity have either been static or falling, instances of murder by firearm have become almost commonplace most towns and cities across the USA. Albuquerque is emblematic of this trend.

Just like the rest of the country, Albuquerque has also been experiencing a murder by firearm ‘surge’. So, as the Wall Street Journal observes:

Despite the largest single-year increase in homicides on record, the overall violent crime rate in [in Albuquerque, in] 2020 remains relatively low by historical standards.

In fact, Albuquerque police records indicate that in 2023 alone, there have already been 73 homicide cases opened, involving 77 victims. Moreover, 83% of these murders involved the use of a firearm. This indicates a murder by firearm rate that is at least fifteen times that of Newcastle.

Consequently, it is evident that the USA is, oddly, both the most rigorously policed country on the earth, as well as being very near the head of the pack in the both the rate of gun ownership and death by gunshot. Yet while any other relatively unbiased observer would thus likely conclude that there is – more than likely – at least some connection between these factors, that does not seem to be the case in much of the commentary in the US. The New Mexico Governor certainly makes such a connection. Additionally, I would suggest that any reasonable observer would likely deem her response as being modest.

The order issued by the New Mexico Governor is only for thirty days, and only applies to carrying weapons in public in Alburquerque. Nothing else. Yet the instant response was dozens of highly armed citizen protestors, marching into the Civic Plaza in the centre of the city, carrying high powered rifles. All before the New Mexico Attorney General, Raúl Torrez, publicly declared that he would not uphold the governor’s public health order, or defend it in court, thus immediately sparking a political war within the local Democratic administration.

The order instantly provoked both partisan and interparty criticism. Some of it ludicrously passionate. Some of it just ludicrous. Mostly it has become a story about the traducing of constitutionally enshrined rights by an overzealous public officer. One picture (published by the Associated Press) features April Polichette, at a ‘Second Amendment Protest’ meeting in Albuquerque, holding a sign that asserts boldly that: ‘The right to bear arms is what keeps us all safe.’

Which brings me to the crux of this missive. Which is that it is evident that much of the media coverage in the US, of a great many topics, is passionately unhinged. I suggest that we have to guard against a similar situation developing in Australia.

For example, the carrying of firearms in public is a constitutionally protected ‘right’ that was invented by right wing activists during the nineteen sixties. All of the jurisprudence up to this date indicates that the second amendment is (as the plain text of the amendment indicates) all about ensuring that the various US states could have their own little armies if they wanted them. Not a great idea, but certainly not as stupid as the idea of allowing every individual citizen to carry around an assault rifle in public. Thus, when I comment that this ‘right’ to carry arms was invented in the modern age, I am simply stating a fact. It does not exist before nineteen sixty. The second amendment does not say that everyone should have the right to carry a gun. The writers of the amendment did not intend for the second amendment to mean that everyone could carry a gun. Nor did those who voted for the amendment ever think that this might be the case.

But more significantly, just because the Supreme Court decided in District of Columbia v. Heller, to entirely renovate the interpretation of this amendment, does not thereby mean that the whole of American history and jurisprudence has also been altered. Nor does it mean that reality has been suddenly re-ordered in accord with right wing ideology.

Yet all of the responses to the order by the New Mexico Governor, from both the right and the left of the political spectrum in the US, has nevertheless been focused on the removal of these ‘rights. The whole basis of the discussion thus implicitly cedes to the right wing the ability to rewrite the past and be shielded from scrutiny. Consequently, I suggest that any discussion of gun control in the US should always commence with a simple acknowledgment that these ‘rights’ are manufactured, for political purposes. That the Federalist Society first stacked the US Supreme Court with partisan political figures and these individuals changed the interpretation of the second amendment to suit their personal political predilections. Yet even though all of this is undoubtedly the case, going by the coverage that is usually provided this issue in the US, the right wing have largely succeeded in rewriting history. Orwell would be astounded at their audacity, yet it seems to work.

In all the US press the proposition that the second amendment protects the right to own and carry a gun – any sort of gun – in public, is now simply assumed. Even though, throughout the ‘wild west’, virtually every town had a law that strictly prohibited the carrying of arms in public. So, all that the Governor of New Mexico is proposing is a return to the status quo circa 1880. A return to the good old days where a similar, quite commonsensical measure was ruthlessly enforced, for the good of everyone in town. (Those paying attention will likely understand that just such a town ordinance is at the centre of the story in the Shootout at the OK Corral.)

Yet the wholesale rewriting of American history and jurisprudence is rarely even mentioned in the mainstream media in the US. Or the takeover of the Supreme Court by a partisan group of religiously inspired nutters. Which brings me to the moral of this essay, which is that we need to reign in the more egregious, ideologically inspired claptrap that often passes for commentary in our media, in Australia; before it is too late to even engage in such a discussion.

The toxic impact of a purely partisan ‘mainstream’ media environment is made manifest in America. It should stand as a warning. The American press is now cut into two separate parts and a similar chasm is developing in our country. It will result in a situation here, just like in the US, where all of the press is chock-full of partisan ideologues, lecturing their partisan audience, on exactly why they should be outraged and regarding exactly how outraged they should be (ie, always very very outraged).

We are already seeing a similar disconnect between reality and the media narrative in some parts of the media in Australia, especially regarding topics such as the upcoming Voice referendum. For example, Marcia Langton labelling much of the recent coverage of the Voice debate in Australia as being racist is nothing more than stating the bleeding obvious (see The Great Australian Gaslighting). Yet instantly, the entire media pack in our country have descended on poor Marcia. Just for describing reality.

I do not want to pretend that the mass media has been better in the past. But I am asserting that we can, and should, aspire to a more nuanced and fact-based media narrative. More importantly, I suggest that we collectively need to revisit the idea that press agencies in our country are expected to be politically aligned. It seems to counter to the public interest that the many different press agencies in the west have decided to not only cover politics but also become politically active.

That these aspirations seem to be naive simply serves to illustrate how low our common expectations have sunk. But unless we begin to look at the coverage of news and current events as being a core and important issue, and take steps to stop our current slide into partisan nonsense, then our Australian media environment may very soon become as hopelessly gridlocked and fractured as in the US.

This is why the current discussions regarding curbing the instances of misinformation and disinformation in our media are both necessary and should be applauded by all Aussies, regardless of their political bent. But these regulatory measures can only be viewed as a starting point. There is a need to move to decentralise our media and unwind the massive monopolies that currently exist. The good health of our democracy depends on cultivating a healthy press environment.

The stakes are high. Big Brother is not just a scary tale. Nineteen-eighty-four is not in our rear-view mirror. Just as in America, very soon parts of our media may also become so utterly detached from reality, that half our population will begin agitating for renovations to our law, in accord with a brand new and improved history of Australia; fashioned just for us out of whole cloth, by News Corp, the Evangelical Church, and the Industrial Arms complex of the United States of Australia.

Have a nice day.

 

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

Donate Button

The Great Australian Gaslighting

We are all accustomed to being fed nonsense by the right-wing. Sky News after dark is largely untouched by common-sense, decency, or journalistic balance. When reading the Australian, or the Telegraph, we all share an expectation that we will likely need to wade through a swamp of ideological claptrap. But it does not have to be this way.

Once upon a time these same media outlets at least pretended that they were trying to be ‘fair and balanced’. There was a sometimes-indistinct line drawn between commentary and the ‘news’. It was a blurry boundary, but it was there. However, in recent days, in their ‘coverage’ of the impending referendum, it seems that the whole of News Corp has been given over to gaslighting. In all their outlets the pending question is never described as being a referendum formulated in response to a grassroots movement, it is ‘Albanese’s referendum’. Or ‘Labor’s referendum’. The LNPs hand in developing the idea has been erased from history. As has any hint of non-partisanship. Instead of a relatively powerless advisory committee, the Voice is depicted as being the plaything of rich aboriginal city-slickers, who are all Labor stooges.

Moreover, the dog-whistle is just about deafening. Every tired old racist trope has been given a further airing. Often many are trotted-out in quick succession. For example, today in the Australian (behind their paywall), Maurice Newman advises his readers that:

If the proposal is carried, a small racial minority will have constitutional privileges denied the majority of Australians. It will permanently define our system of government as one country, two systems. It will establish a platform for the politics of envy. The very expectation of race-based benefits is no doubt reflected in the latest census, which recorded a 25 per cent jump in those identifying as Indigenous.

The Uluru Statement from the Heart may be well-intended, but its authors are open to the charge that it’s really about more power and money for elites. After all, Indigenous people are anything but voiceless now. Indeed, in the past 15 years, thousands of Indigenous voices have been heard and tens of billions of taxpayer dollars, together with royalties and service payments, invested where the collective voices recommended. It is not clear how an additional voice will improve Indigenous lives.

It is a wonder the sun doesn’t momentarily dim every time Newman opens his mouth! I will not canvass any more of this article as further exposure could very well cause actual brain damage. And it would provide the article and author with a degree of consideration that they do not warrant. Plus, the details are entirely immaterial. There is no actual intent to deliver a message – just stir the possum. These many articles are designed to support and reinforce the torrent of racist bullshit and nonsense that is being given voice in the threads of these newspapers and all across the right-wing swamp. These are not articles designed to inform but rather inflame.

Which brings me to the nub of this article. The difficulty with political commentary such as this is that it commonly hides behind the proposition that all that is being advanced is merely an ‘opinion’. So, even though the author is presenting puerile and tangibly insulting claptrap which is quite obviously designed to reinforce many of the commonplace lies that are currently circulating within the right-wing media, it is not illegal (even though it is palpably dishonourable and despicable). Nor should it be illegal. What is needed is to address the root cause of this problem, which is that we only have two large media conglomerates in our country, one of which is a right-wing outfit, while the other is a far-right wing organisation that is owned by Americans and is run from America.

I feel passionately about the need for media sector reform as that is the only way to effectively banish this sort of hateful rhetoric from our mainstream press. It results from allowing just one or two players to have an outsized impact upon the social discourse. Regulating what can be said by any given journalist is not going to address this sort of problem. The problem is not the language but rather the tacit and sometimes enthusiastic pedalling of falsehoods via a massive megaphone. We need lots and lots of smaller megaphones.

Regulating the minutiae of the press is not an option, simply because it does not work. It will not address this problem. The right wing in Australia know that they are pandering to a racist minority and they carefully, yet quite consciously, craft articles such as that quoted above, which are all dog-whistle and no substance. These many utterly objectionable articles are not being written by fools, nor are they being read by fools. A racist dog-whistle is being sounded gleefully and its meaning is being clearly understood. If you change the rules then the tune being played will simply change – yet the noxious intent and the facility to do mischief will remain. As Marcia Langton observes,

They’re very clever falsehoods. They appeal to the long-held tropes of discrimination. You know, we’ve heard words like ‘squalid’, ‘underbelly’, ‘maintain the rage’ thrown about. It’s as if, you know, the frontier wars were still happening. It’s very disappointing that so many Australians have been deceived…

But I am not as forgiving as Marcia. I know that many of the people who are throwing these racist tropes about are doing so quite deliberately. Yes, many readers are being deceived, but many others are enthusiastic about being given the chance to air their repugnant racist views in public without drawing down upon themselves any well-deserved derision.

Thus, we are all witnessing the Great Australian Gaslighting of 2024. It may or may not be successful. But regardless of the outcome of the referendum, these last few weeks have served to illustrate just why there is a pressing need for a Royal Commission into the media sector.

During the last few weeks, the Murdoch newspapers have been quite deliberately, and successfully, stoking racial division and disharmony in Australia. Which demonstrates the disproportionate degree of influence that is currently being welded by News Corp; which is a foreign controlled entity that is based in America. The influence of this media group is palpable. Consider that at the moment, the right-wing forces in our country are not in government anywhere on the mainland or in the federal sphere. Yet despite this overwhelming rejection by the Australian public, our media is still chocka-block full of the concerns and fears of the right-wing conservative rump.

Very few Aussies are far right-wing conservatives, yet we nevertheless have an entire segment of the press in our country, including several major masthead newspapers, that enthusiastically embrace and openly advocate for such an ideological position. As a result, it is evident that News Corp is acting as a political player and not just a disinterested media concern. For the entirety of the last year, the actual federal opposition in Australia has been News Corp – not the LNP.

This is an unacceptable situation. So, I would suggest that regardless of the outcome of the referendum, the behavior of News Corp during the last few weeks demonstrates that the right-wing press is currently a clear and present danger to our national interests.

The gross concentration of media ownership in our country is a problem that must be addressed soon. The existing monopolies must be broken up. The ability for one corporation to own large segments of both print and broadcast media, in several states, must be eliminated. We must return to the days when we had laws that served to supress the development of just these sorts of media monopolies. After all; there were laws in place to guard against the situation that we currently find ourselves in. Laws that were progressively watered down and abolished in response to the many lies that were sold to us by these same media magnates.

Those with long memories will remember how, over the course of several decades, the need for both horizontal and vertical integration in the media sector was sold to us by these big media conglomerates as being necessary. We were confidently informed that the only way to ensure that our media sector would not fail in the new digital world was to allow the big players to get bigger. So, for twenty years, we were all constantly fed a diet of unadulterated bullshit.

Despite the massive concentration of ownership that we now enjoy, all of the negative outcomes that we were warned about have nevertheless still come to pass. Most of the newspaper groups have disappeared and all of the large newsrooms have been merged. Almost all of the small regional newspapers have been bought up by the bigger players, then shuttered. Thousands of journalists have been laid off. And now we have only two huge media corporations left standing. Which is the worst of all possible outcomes – unless you are an owner or shareholder a media conglomerate.

The current referendum debate concretely demonstrates that the current media environment in Australia is not serving our national interests. At the moment, the whims of one non-Australian media owner, living in another country, are serving to dictate the nature and content of much of the social and political discourse of our country. As a consequence, our social discourse is becoming less civil and more extreme. Due to the baleful influence of News Corp and its deliberate spreading of misinformation and racist claptrap, after this referendum is over, regardless of the outcome, there needs to be a reckoning.

That the political thuggery has become quite overt is well illustrated by another article in the Australian today (also behind the paywall), in which the top corporate contributors to the ‘Yes’ campaign are listed as if they are guilty of war crimes. The article invites the reader to deride the corporations and their leaders, which are all named and shamed individually. The inescapable inference being that it would be a dandy idea if all of the readers of the newspaper boycotted these companies. Which, I would suggest, are just the sort of transparent mafia tactics that we can all live without.

The political thuggery has become overt. There has to be pushback, to not do so would be dangerous.

 

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

Donate Button

A World Without Trump: The Great Orange Flameout of 2024

It’s going to be huuuge. The election campaign in the US of A, next year, will be bigger than Ben Hur. However, I am going to go out on a limb and suggest that many commentators are talking shit.

The media is obviously struggling to cope with the dawning new reality. Namely, that Trump is political toast. That point where all the chickens come home to roost has at last arrived. You have all been asking ‘Are we there yet! Are we there yet!’ And now we have arrived. Thus, anyone who cares to look out the window will notice that everyone who is familiar with Trump’s travails is either giggling, looking for a new job, or changing channels.

Don’t take my word for it, just weigh the scenario for yourself. Donald Trump is now facing more than several criminal indictments and has already been told, nicely, by at least two judges, to please stop abusing judges, counsellors, prosecutors, and those testifying against him. He has largely ignored these requests.

How long do you think it will be before Trump lashes out at a prosecutor or a judge in a way that simply cannot be ignored? I suggest that by the time we all get around to Christmas lunch, we will already be sick of hearing about Trump being locked up, yet again, for contempt.

Others have done all the same sums. The Governor of Florida, at the moment running second in the Republican primaries, is currently being very, very careful with his words. I just heard one otherwise fairly rational commentator observe that this is odd, considering that he is thirty points behind Trump. ‘So why is he behaving like a front-runner?’ he asks.

I find this disappointing. It indicates that this poor fellow is so deeply engaged in beating up on Trump that he has failed to realise that Trump is already a political corpse. Guvnor De Santos knows this. He knows he is actually the front runner. That Trump is no longer in the race.

For those who are failing to pay attention: let me explain the bleeding obvious in simple terms.

The only people left in America who actually like Trump are a few far, far right-wing politicians, the consumers of right-wing media, and some of the entirely non-informed. Everyone else hates the chappie. Even the owners of the far-right media are ambivalent. You get the sense that they prefer their fascists to be a little more coherent and a tad more competent.

Therefore, while I believe that the election campaign will be huuuge, it will not match the spectacle of Donald Trump v the rest of America, as he flames out in a huge fireball of angry indignation and incompetence.

The numbers do not lie, and the numbers currently indicate that Trump, even should he stumble anywhere near an election campaign, would have snowballs hope in Hades of winning. He is currently the most actively hated person in America.

A substantial majority of women dislike Trump. Along with democrats, teachers, students, unionists and anyone who has ever worn a Che Guevara tee-shirt. But while these people dislike him intensely, it is generally not nearly as much as many Republicans. This is because, ever since the first wave of conspiracy obsessed, flag-waving, MAGA crazed fans crashed through the doors of the Republican Party, in 2016, the Republican Party of America has been engaged in a civil war. Most of the Republican old-guard have since come to hate Trump with a greater passion than even the Hilliary deprived. They are no longer in charge of a staid and feared bastion of power. (See The real fight is between America and the Trump cultists; and America is kicking butt). Worse, the bastion has fallen to weirdos with a bunch of stunningly weird ideas. Which is fair-enough for a Republican, but in this case these strange ideas all serve to benefit only one person, not the 1%. Which does not make any sense?

Yet still, for now, the right-wing media remain captive of their own audience. They are hemmed in by the truly loony far, far right-wing media outlets, so they have to ever feature Trump, and ever repeat that they truly and dearly love the fellow. They have to eternally explain that if you listen to him carefully, in just the right way, then he makes perfect and enduring sense. And, of course, they must ever profess that they believe he will win. But even on the couch at FOX n’ Friends you can sense that they know the end is nigh. Soon the knives will be out.

Indeed, very soon it will become almost impossible for anyone, including the right-wing press and crazed Trump critics, to sustain the fantasy (or nightmare) of a potential Trump victory.

The most important number has nothing to do with presidential popularity, but rather Trump’s extraordinary and growing unpopularity. In January of this year even the most favourable polls had Trump’s disapproval numbers in the low fifties. But in recent days polling shows that a tipping point has been reached. His supporters are all jumping ship. On FiveThirtyEight the average of polls shows that in just a couple of weeks Trumps unpopularity has soared, from the low fifties into the low sixties, with a corresponding drop in his approval numbers. Plus, these polls are looking backwards a couple of weeks, and he has hardly had a good ten or so days.

I know that we have all been hearing about the imminent downfall of Trump for what feels like forever. But Trump is currently older than Reagan was when he completed his second term, is currently under massive pressure, and very soon may even be forced to pay for his lawyers out of his own pocket.

The sharks are circling ever closer. As soon as Christmas, I humbly suggest, Trump will be out of the running, dead, or in goal.

But regardless of how the end game unfolds, you can be assured it is about to commence. Thus, a world without Donald Trump is nudging ever closer. I promise. Yes, kiddies; we are nearly there.

 

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

Donate Button

We have the media we want

I know they are coming for my stuff. I read the Telegraph.

Aboriginal, gay, unemployed single mothers stalk our streets. Refugees flood our beaches. Transgender porn fills libraries and small businessmen weep in the street while being beaten by communist Union Officials. All while Vietnamese, Chinese, Indonesian and assorted other hordes are all poised. Plus, Aboriginals want my suburban block.

But even so. We have the media we deserve. It has been created to sell us what we want. To pander to our particularly vacuous modern brand of fear and loathing.

In 2018, Steve Bannon observed that: “The Democrats don’t matter. The real opposition is the media. And the way to deal with them is to flood the zone with shit.”

But this seemingly pithy observation serves to distract from the actually tragic reality. Namely, it is impossible to flood the zone with shit. It is already flooded with shit. Well before there was a right-wing media the modern broadcasting landscape was already a barren wasteland studded with noxious cesspits. Yes, in one far corner there is a rarely accessed little door that is labelled ‘The real world and rational commentary’. But nobody is interested.

So, while we attack ‘the media’. The reality is that we already have precisely the media that we want. Our media is full of very sick and perverted ideas and people because our society is full of sick and perverted people. We only like to pretend we are ‘nice’. (Get over it.)

As a baby boomer, like all my peers, I respond instantly to fear and loathing. Our generation was going to change the world. We would forsake the military industrial complex that had enslaved earlier, less enlightened generations. We would tear down hypocrisy, religion, and bigotry.

Yet while the dream lasted just a fleeting childhood, it has haunted us all ever since. We cultivated a phantasm of hip skepticism and now all we have left is disenchantment and disbelief.

The new millennium has thus been especially difficult for boomers. We had corporately pledged to live fast and die young and pure – until we inherited. Then we caged the chickens and set aside actively believing or not-believing. It was complicated. After all, why go to all the bother of believing in things when you have cable? It is much easier to occupy a shallow and fleeting attention-span with porn, action movies, and lectures on the need to be terribly, terribly afraid.

So – we are the media. Every caricature you see selling hate and DazzTM on the tele is just a pale reflection of someone living on your street. Television is full of horribly ill-informed and shallow creeps simply because society is full of horribly ill-informed and shallow creeps. There are few deep thinkers simply because we don’t spend time thinking. We are not a population of thinkers. We collectively crave for distraction and entertainment; not information.

We like to think that we are good scholarly people, who like to watch and listen to ‘good’ media, but we are not. In fact, we are a bunch of morally and intellectually corrupt creeps – and so our media is jam-packed with morally and intellectually corrupt creeps. But they are photogenic and charismatic creeps.

Yes, right-wing media channels are fashioning output carefully tailored to a receptive audience. But so are the rest. So, if ‘the media’ is atrocious, it is because we – collectively – are atrocious. Moreover, if we want to continue with an actually democratic system, where everyone has both a media and a voice, then we will always have a media that is chaotic, partisan, and flooded with ‘shit’. Until we become some entirely other sort of animal that is not snarky, horrible, ill-informed and intellectually corrupt. In other words: something entirely non-human.

Until then: Viva la chaos.

 

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

Donate Button

Bidenomics: Four Charts (to upset the doubters)

I do not believe that the President of the US is personally responsible for the state of the US economy. No rational person could believe such a thing.

However, lots of right-wing commentators want to assert that Biden is single-handedly destroying the US economy. They propose that the advent of ‘Bidenomics’ has led to soaring inflation, growing unemployment, stagnant wages, and a stock exchange headed south.

This is bullshit. All of it. The correlation between who might be president, and the condition of the US economy, is tentative at best. But even if there was a direct and uncomplicated correlation, the whole ‘Bidenomics’ narrative is still bullshit.

The next time a right-winger wants to spout nonsense about ‘Bidenomics’, first refer them to the following four charts, then advise them to either piss-off, or stop parading their ignorance in public.

While such an exposure to reality is unlikely to stop them talking bullshit, it will make you feel better. Plus, you will have avoided the need to talk any further with a fool.

Win/Win.

Sources:

 

Inflation:

https://www.statista.com/statistics/1312060/us-inflation-rate-federal-reserve-interest-rate-monthly/

 

Wages:

https://www.statista.com/statistics/1312060/us-inflation-rate-federal-reserve-interest-rate-monthly/

 

Stock Market:

https://www.statista.com/statistics/1312060/us-inflation-rate-federal-reserve-interest-rate-monthly/

 

Employment:

https://www.statista.com/statistics/1312060/us-inflation-rate-federal-reserve-interest-rate-monthly/

 

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

Donate Button

Great Moments in Jurisprudence: The Cheese Guy and Trump

One of Trump’s co-defendants –the (very soon to be) ex-lawyer Mr Chesebro – just took a metaphorical swing at the Prosecutor, and hit Trump.

As you may be aware, Fulton County in Georgia is hosting a trial of 19 defendants on racketeering charges. Lawyers for the Boss of the crime syndicate, one Mr D. Trump, have indicated that they believe a trial date in early 2026 would likely be suitable. Pointing to a mountain of evidence that they say they need to sort through to be able to adequately defend the action.

This sort of delaying tactic is commonplace in racketeering cases. But in this instance it would likely be unpersuasive. This is because, the claim that there is a need to carefully read every document in evidence is a bit of a furphy. After all, the vast bulk of the evidence in question (for all of the defendant’s involved) is made up almost entirely of their own documents. But even as the lawyers were thus shaping up for a battle regarding the scheduling of the matter – it was all overtaken by other legal events.

After an especially long lunch (it must be supposed) a group of the Crime Boss’s lawyers got together and worked out a bold and cunning strategy to get all of the charges – against everyone – dropped. It was a new strategy that hinges on Georgia’s Speedy Trial Act.

In the right-wing press it has long been celebrated, as a fact, that Fani Willis (the Prosecutor) has rushed to lay these many charges for purely partisan political reasons. Therefore, the case is only half-prepared but she is nevertheless rushing to lay charges so that this can interfere with Trumps political campaigning. So, the lawyers for the crime syndicate decided to use this obscene haste and lack of preparedness against the prosecution. They would tell Fani Willis to ‘put up or shut up’. They would force the prosecutor’s hand.

The Speedy Trial Act of Georgia requires that, upon application, someone who is charged with a crime (that does not attract the death penalty) can demand a trial within ninety days of their charging date. Otherwise, the prosecution has to drop all the charges.

Thus, a group of lawyers acting for the Cheese Guy filed a motion demanding a severance of his case from that of the other defendant’s, and a speedy trial. Fani Willis was going to be exposed for a fraud and would have to either go to trial utterly unprepared or drop the charges.

Unfortunately for both the Crime Boss and the Cheese Guy, this strategy was flawed. While the commonsense and everyday knowledge of the right-wing media has been endlessly proposing that the Prosecutor has hastily cobbled a case together, in just the last five or so minutes, from fond aspirations and bluetack, this is incorrect. Who could have guessed?

Instead of being ambushed, in response to the application by the Cheese Guy, Fani Willis just said ‘Yes’. But not just for the Cheese Guy. She is ready to go on all counts as soon as the court might please. Apparently, it seems that her whole office has been carefully and methodically compiling a detailed case against all of the defendants for at least the last two years. The prosecutor therefore informed the court that she agreed that a speedy trial, for everyone, would be an absolutely fab idea.

So, a couple of days ago the judge ruled on the application and issued a case specific scheduling order. In the order he declares that:

‘due to the Defendant’s timely Demand for Speedy Trial filed August 23, 2023 (Doc. 5), scheduling [for all the cases] will occur on an expedited timeline.’

The judge set Chesebro’s trial for Oct 23. He also indicated that because all the other defendants have a similar right to a speedy trial, firm trial dates for all the accused will also be set on this date. Yes, the Cheese Guy is right; it is essential to guard against impinging on the civil rights of the defendants.

Ooops.

So, due to this great moment in modern jurisprudence, Trump and Co will all go to trial very soon after October the 23rd. Moreover, this is an outcome that is actually far worse than it might appear at first glance.

The Cheese Guy will now likely get a separate trial, prior to the rest of the cases being heard. The first trial will therefore be one lonely lawyer, all by himself, facing charges of conspiracy to commit impersonation of a public official, conspiracy to commit forgery, and conspiracy to commit filing false documents. Which is a case featuring a mountain of evidence that is fairly easy to lay out. The Cheese Guy was the person who came up with the phony electors scheme in the first place. He was the one who then sold it to the rest of the conspirators. As a consequence, the whole of the case against the Cheese Guy is spelled out in his own memos and power-point slides.

As one commentator at the Washington Post observed:

Chesebro authored a Nov. 18, 2020, memo recommending an alternative slate of electors in states where litigation was still pending. In a Dec. 6, 2020, memo, Chesebro advised that they could drum up phony electors in six states to give Vice President Mike Pence the opportunity to throw the election to Trump.

The outcome of this attempted ambush is, therefore, that now the judge is obliged to try Trump and co promptly, and that this series of trials will likely commence with an action against one unlikeable lawyer, with unconventional ideas, that features lots and lots of simply damning evidence, instead of a trial featuring Trump. Instead of a popular politician, the accused will be a lawyer. Plus, the defence now has very little time to prepare as the Speedy Trial clock is now ticking.

Trump usually shoots himself in the foot but it seems that he is now also outsourcing the task to his lawyers. It is almost enough to raise the proposition of an appeal on the basis of inadequate counsel (which is a bit of a damning commentary on the nature of the advice that Trump and Co seem to be receiving).

Stay tuned for updates…

 

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

Donate Button

Trumpty-Dumpty or Wishful Thinking?

Trump has been astoundingly successful. He is a narcissist. He desperately craves attention. And he gets it in spades.

Ever since trundling down the elevator in his eponymously named Tower, Donald Trump has smiled, scowled and scuttled across a billion tele screens. He has featured in a zillion newspaper articles.

Everywhere you might want to glance, Trump inspired craziness is unfolding and a worried group of protesters are protesting. Trump is compulsory.

Resistance seems not only pointless, but impossible. Our media is Trump obsessed and Trump dependent. Everything – politics, sport, comedy and cooking – is Trump themed. I haven’t googled it, but I am nevertheless sure you can buy a Trumpsicle, at least somewhere in the good ol’ US of A.

Some rip large chunks of hair from parts of their shivering liberal carcass. Others drink. Some saner citizens have simply winked out of digital existence, and presumably now live entirely ignorant, happy, non-Trumpified lives. (The cowardly lucky bastards.)

However, do not despair my fellow liberal snowflakes, there are some vague indications that the era of wall-to-wall Trump coverage may only last another ten or so years. That maybe (I know it is a difficult thing to conceptualize) that somewhere – way off in the distant future – there may yet be a media and entertainment world that contains just a tiny tiny wee bit less Trump. (I know! But can’t we at least dream?)

I have launched this optimistic kamikaze-like diatribe on the basis that, even way out in the furthest reaches of Rightwingistan, the tone of the media discussion has recently slightly altered. While the strange language used in these parts still seems (to the uninitiated) no less hysterical, an odd hesitancy can now be discerned. The couch at Fox ‘n Friends currently spends far more time examining the southern border, and Hunter Bidens’ bedroom, than they do Trump, per se. Whole minutes now elapse without seeing or hearing the Donald.

Plus, I was watching the massive, all-station coverage of the little brouhaha that erupted outside the courtroom a few weeks back, when Jack Smith hauled Trump up on charges of inciting nastiness and mayhem. As Trump and anti-Trump silliness was erupting all around, a small group of Trump supporters, all wearing red hats and Trump regalia, were clustered around a laptop watching baseball.

Trumpty-Dumpty will fall. But not because anyone will see sense. Or because the justice system will eventually catch up with the fellow.

Trumpism will pass into history very quickly because it is becoming boring. And the viewing public can put up with bullshit and silliness, conceit, corruption and utter lunacy; but when you become boring and predictable then people start tuning out.

The middle-class, short attention span of the American viewing public will rescue the world.

(OK. I agree. We’re fucked.)

 

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

Donate Button

The real fight is between America and the Trump cultists; and America is kicking butt

All those readers of the press who have a life are generally depressed about events in the US. This is because there seems hardly enough time to pay attention to the torrent of bad political news coming out of America. We are all constantly being bombarded by updates on Trump’s legal travails, all the murky details of Hunter Biden and his laptop, and sundry distressing stories about a feeble President who might very well be at deaths door.

But those of us who don’t have a life, and instead endlessly troll the media to avoid interacting with actual people, have time enough to glimpse an entirely different America. An entirely different country to the one that is commonly depicted in the Aussie press.

First of all, how many Aussies would realise that the US is currently enjoying a booming economy? With the annual inflation rate slowing to 3% in June (which is the lowest since March of 2021). Or that the unemployment rate is currently the lowest it has ever been in the history of the Republic? Or that the stock market keeps hitting record highs? Or that during the last six months the number of people crossing the southern border has dropped 22%? Or that there has been a boom in wages across the country? Or that construction spending on factories has soared nearly 80% in the last year. Or that (according to the Census Bureau) public works spending has increased (13.6%), with electric power projects booming (up 36.7%), as well as conservation and development projects (up 30.1%), and expenditure on highways and streets rapidly increasing (up 20.4%).

I would suggest that most of this positive information has managed to entirely bypass most Australian readers because the papers in our country commonly paint an entirely different picture. (For reasons that I talk about endlessly elsewhere…).

This also means that Aussies are generally unaware that the battle between a Trump dominated GOP and the Democratic Party, and the legal travails that are slowly smothering Trump, adds up to less than half of the important political story.

In Aus we have a right-wing press that totally ignores the ‘big picture’ politics in the US. It is focused, instead, on presenting commentary on the happenings in the federal political scene.

Consequently, our papers present the politics of the US in a simplistic fashion, as being all about the GOP v the Dems. But this commentary (which is generally deeply partisan) usually fails to assist an Aussie in understanding the domestic context within which these remarks are being made. Which is to say, all of this commentary generally fails to describe many things that American readers would consider to be ‘bleeding obvious’ but which are nevertheless hardly ever mentioned in the Australian press (including the matters earlier canvassed as well as those that follow).

I would suggest that Aussies could also be forgiven for not knowing that there has been an ongoing civil war inside the GOP – between the Trumpers and the Traditionalists – that has been raging for the last ten years.

The Trumpsters are not interested in compromise. This is mainly because, unlike earlier right-wing populist groups like the ‘Tea Party’ Patriots, the Trumpsters are not at all interested in policy, or even politics. They are only interested in the world that Trump has promised. And in the south, over the last ten years this group has ruthlessly pushed the traditionalists out. Which means that the GOP grip on their southern strongholds is slipping.

When Trump arrived on the scene, the GOP heartland in the southern states had long been secured by a history of solid local support and a host of gerrymandered seats. This, and the distortions provided by an odd electoral college system, had long allowed the Southern GOP to hold onto office pretty much regardless of what the population might want to say as well as maintain a disproportionate amount of influence federally. All of which requires planning and organisation.

Then Trump arrived.

For an Aussie audience it cannot be overstated how important it is that about fifty-five percent of the really attached Trump supporters in the US are generally uninterested in politics. Which is to say, prior to Trumps’ descent of the escalator, they were unaffiliated voters. These people are interested in and attached to Trump, not the GOP.

This influx of newly interested activists into the ranks of the GOP had an initial effect of boosting the hype, the vote, and the GOP coffers, across the US. It got Trump elected. But then momentum faltered. Mainly because the Trump Presidency was a success ONLY for the newly enthused loony right and their media boosters – for everyone else, both in the US and elsewhere, it was an evident disaster.

This is the part of the story that is bleeding obvious to any American, but which is generally missed by Aussies. In the last ten years, events have entirely refashioned state and federal politics in the US. When Trump arrived on the scene the southern strongholds of the GOP appeared secure. Colorado, Michigan, Ohio, Minnesota, Georgia, Arizona, Mississippi, and Florida (amongst others) were the ideological heartland of Republicanism. These southern states were run by authoritarian and ruthlessly efficient political machines and were backed by a consortium of corporations and very rich individuals.

Then Trump failed dismally, and a civil war ensued.

Too few Aussies are aware of how significant it is that virtually every person who gave evidence at all of the impeachments, were GOP traditionalists. The informants were people that Trump had appointed, not Democrats.

Then Trump was defeated in 2020 by GOP Traditionalists, not by Biden.

Then most of the sixty cases that Trump subsequently lost were heard by judges that Trump had appointed, in states that are run by the GOP.

Then Roe v Wade made the whole thing very real for all the Americans who hadn’t been paying attention. Suddenly, the dog had caught the car. Nobody was happy.

At once politics was vitally important for young people who were not political or religious. As well as everyone related to them.

The Roe v Wade rejection has been the biggest setback the GOP has faced in the modern era. Trump and his acolytes, and the ideologues at the Federalist Society, as well as the rabid high court justices, all failed to appreciate that the distant prospect of a ban on abortion was a wonderful thing. But the reality is precisely the opposite.

Ever since the Roe rejection, the GOP hold on state politics has been slipping. Because the once reliable GOP political machinery in the southern states has recently been replaced with a series of dinky-toys being ridden by amateur Trump cultists, so the response to the disaster of Roe has been to double down on Trumpist purity and conspiracy theories. Thus, even the Wall Street Journal (run by Rupert) has guardedly acknowledged that the whole southern GOP enterprise is currently teetering on the edge of an electoral cliff. In an article today a staff writer observed that:

“In Colorado, Dave Williams, the new head of the state Republican party, has attacked Republicans he deems insufficiently conservative. In June he announced he had negotiated an agreement with the Colorado Libertarian Party, which would stay out of certain races. “The Libertarians will only stand down if we recruit and nominate candidates who are more pro-freedom than not,” he said in the statement.

In Georgia, the fallout from the 2020 presidential election has state GOP officials fighting each other over whether pro-Trump Republicans who worked to overturn President Biden’s election should be purged or praised.

State GOP parties in Arizona and Minnesota are struggling financially.

In Michigan, the statewide party organization has embraced conspiracy theories and far-right political views. The party website, for example, has a section pledging to stop what it deems a global cabal. “The Democrat party, in direct partnership with China and globalist organizations, has abandoned Detroit and the working class,” it says.

“The new folks don’t even consider us Republicans anymore,” said John Truscott, once an aide to former Republican Gov. John Engler.

“I would say they’re running it into the ground,” he said of the new party stalwarts, “but it’s already imploded. They’re out of money, they can’t do anything.”

So, take heart, my friends. Always remember that the whole Trump fiasco has been written, conducted, and wholly staffed by the Republican Party and the Trump cultists. Democrats have only really had walk-on roles during the last few years. And do not be misled by the narrative that being pushed by much of the media in our country about a big GOP v Dems stoush.

The reason that all the nonsense coming from the US often sounds so histrionic and implausible is – because it is. The right wing and their media backers in the US have been engaged in a losing battle with the rest of America.

Ever since Trump was booted out in 2020, the whole GOP card castle has been falling apart. So, whenever you see something in the media about the fight between the GOP and the Dems, do not be fooled.

The real fight is between America and the Trump cultists; and America is kicking butt.

 

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

Donate Button

Forty years after my first and only arrest for cannabis – not much has changed

Forty years ago, while living in a share-house in Port Stephens (north of Newcastle, NSW), I arrived home from work one evening to a house that was suddenly and inexplicably littered with drug paraphernalia. Of course, I immediately gathered most of it onto the coffee table in the loungeroom and puzzled over it. Then, after a very official pounding on my front door, the house was suddenly full of coppers.

Initially I was interrogated about the bongs, pipes, syringes, and bottles of pills that I had helpfully laid out for them on the coffee table – all before a constable walked in carrying a small planter containing two cannabis seedlings. After which, suddenly and magically, all of the paraphernalia, syringes, bottles of pills, and even any hint of their existence, simply disappeared. I was transported to the Newcastle lockup and charged with ‘Cultivating Indian Hemp’.

When I fronted court the next morning the police helpfully provided the Magistrate with a transcript of a confession that I had (purportedly) made. It seems that I had admitted to conspiring to grow several hundred cannabis plants in the nearby bushland and that I had been planning to sell the drug in the township. Nevertheless, the police had heroically nipped this dastardly conspiracy in the bud. They had also reluctantly decided to proceed with only a cultivation charge, instead of also adding a ‘conspiracy to supply’ charge (but inquiries were still ‘ongoing’).

The Beak scowled, declared that I was so very lucky that I only had driving and alcohol convictions on my sheet, otherwise I would be ‘banged up smartly’. But because this was the case, he was going to ‘go easy’. All before fining me $2900.00 and giving me just one month to pay. (So, adjusted for inflation, in 2022 dollars, I was fined $12,796.19 for two cannabis seedlings that did not even belong to me). Moreover, in those days, if you couldn’t pay a fine you were locked up until you had ‘cut the fine out’ at the rate of $85 a day. Consequently, a month later I showed up at the Silverwater Penitentiary to cut out my fines.

In the same week that I was imprisoned, Dr Kerr opened the National Organization for the Reform of Marihuana Laws (NORML) office (in Seaforth) in Sydney. So, immediately upon release, I fronted at the office and signed up to protest the cannabis laws. A few decades later I would be part of the founding of the HEMP Party. Another decade on and there would even be members of state legislatures that are part of the cannabis law reform movement.

But the moral of this story is hardly uplifting. Four decades after my one and only cannabis charge, not much has changed. The BIG LIE – that cannabis is a dangerous drug – still dominates in our politics, press and social mythologies. The police might be more subtle in their oppression, but they still terrorize cannabis users every day of the week. Being ‘verballed’ in a court room might be a thing of the past, but otherwise law-abiding citizens nevertheless continue to be hauled up before the Magistracy and gaoled or fined on the basis that the state is protecting them from harm.

Four decades later many of my personal circumstances have changed. I am now an academic lawyer. I teach other lawyers about the ‘Philosophy of Law’ and ‘Constitutional Law’. But I am still at the mercy of these unjust and ridiculous laws. I still have to travel overseas to be able to smoke a cone without fear of arrest. I still cannot enjoy a joint legally in this country. And while the politicians rarely still refer to cannabis as being a ‘moral hazard’, the BIG LIE nevertheless still persists. These hypocrites continue to perversely insist that they are protecting us cannabis users from ‘harm’ – by gaoling and fining us!

They can shove their phony concern up their tight sphincters for all I care. This is because, despite the passage of more than forty years, the same knee-jerk bigotries are still everywhere on display.

The bullshit persists, even though, in the intervening years, it has also become obvious to almost everyone in our society (aside from politicians and lobbyists), that every cent spent on policing or regulating the cultivation, sale, and use of cannabis, on the basis that these laws are needed to protect us from ‘harm’, is simply money thrown away. Most Aussies now fully understand that our leaders might as well be burning huge wads of cash in a forty-four-gallon drum, on the steps of parliament house, and justifying it on the basis that they are keeping us ‘warm’.

So, in recent times I have given up on even pretending to be tolerant of all of the bullshit. In recent encounters, whenever any elected official begins to talk bullshit about cannabis in my presence, they are at once interrupted and asked about the ‘harm’ they are proposing to protect me from? I also ask why they seem to show this phony concern about the health of the citizenry when talking about cannabis, but not when talking about rugby, alcohol, paracetamol, fishing, aspirin, parasailing, horse-riding, or sugar?

I then ask them to tell me precisely how it is dangerous? Also, where and when did any particular instance of harm occur? In other words, they will be invited to name just one person – on the face of the globe – who has been killed or maimed by cannabis use, ever.

I feel that such intolerance is warranted. I am simply well past engaging in any sort of hypocritical charade with a bunch of ill-informed liars and fools. I suggest others follow suit. Cannabis is a relatively harmless recreational drug and therapeutic herb. I will no longer watch as moral purists and political partisans continue to highjack the debate and flood the zone with bullshit.

We need to acknowledge that we are not participating in a ‘debate’ that is being undertaken in good faith by all parties. Cannabis law reformers are advocating for the facts; opponents of cannabis law reform are engaging in fear-mongering.

If a politician in 2023 is not aware of the truth, they need to be voted out of office as they are grossly ignorant. If a politician in 2023 continues to insist that cannabis is a dangerous drug – they need to be voted out of office on the basis that they are knowingly lying to the Australian public.

I just want to be able to have a quiet toke at home and not be hassled by the coppers. But four decades of being polite has achieved precisely nothing. I still have to hide my cannabis use. The liars and fools remain in charge. If you think cannabis should remain illegal, and say so in public, you are either a fool or a bigot. So will loudly invite you to mind your own business and stop talking crap.

I reckon the time for tolerating bullshit is waaay past.

VOTE FOR HONESTY, EQUALITY and ‘NO BULLSHIT’ POLITICIANS.

Free the weed: VOTE #1 LCA (Legalise Cannabis Australia).

 

 

 

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

Donate Button