Dutton's naked power grab

"Our nation faces a slow decline if it takes no action on…

The Fragility of Democracy: Hong Kong, China and…

It has been a history of turns and the occasional betrayal, but…

The falsity of fake news

By Henry Johnston  Difficult to pin down when this narrative actually began, but…

Fields of Deceit

“For the farmer sows his fieldsOf barley, oats or wheat.While the lawyer…

Another three years of Slow Decline

The CSIRO has released a study titled Australian National Outlook, comparing two…

They've got a mandate

By 2353NM  You’ve probably heard politicians and commentators suggest that various acts should…

From the hand to the mind

Dalla mano alla mente ... (From the hand to the mind).The trade-guild…

Matters of Water: Dubious Approvals and the Adani…

“When a company wields such power that it can cause a Minister…

«
»
Facebook

Morrison Tells Us That We Should Be Sick Of People Telling Us What To Do!

Yes, you may have missed it but just before Scottie flew off to tell Fiji that they don’t know what they’re talking about when it comes to their own citizenship laws or climate change, he wrote a piece about how Australians weren’t angry and that it was just a few “angry noisy voices” (sic. Where’s the comma between the adjectives?) causing any suggestion that he wasn’t the most popular PM we’ve had in almost six months.

He began: “When I called into the Shoalhaven Heads Hotel on the NSW South Coast over the break, it was nice to spend time with Australians from all walks of life who had a positive outlook.” 

Here is a photo from the article. It depicts these Australians from all walks of life:

Now for those of you who are thinking that this has even less diversity than a Coalition front bench, you’d be wrong because ScoMo adds that these were: “Locals, holiday makers staying at caravan parks, small business people from western Sydney, surf lifesavers, fishing and rural fire service members, professionals, kids, mums, retirees, pensioners.” Obviously, he met more people than just those in the photo. It must simply be that these were the only ones prepared to pose with him. To be fair, there was another photo of him with a bald guy, captioned, “The PM meets some locals”.

He then went on to tell us: “There was no sign of the angry mob on social and in other media, shouting at each other and telling us all what we’re supposed to do, think and say.”  Which is pretty funny coming on top of his insistence that local councils hold citizenship ceremonies on January 26th and enforce dress codes.

From his holiday, Scottie gleaned a number of things.

Amazingly, people are concerned with everyday life, they want jobs, they want the economy to be strong, incomes to keep up with the cost of living, Medicare to make healthcare affordable, kids to be safe, kids to be smiling, fair treatment at work, not to be ripped off or played for a mug, a welfare system that looks after those doing it tough but not to be a free ride because the best form of welfare is a job… Which I’ve always interpreted as: “Get off ya backside, ya lazy bludger. Jesus healed the lame and blind so there’s no excuse!” These were all in the list and I am not exaggerating, even if I was tempted to add that we all wanted to “get along like we used to in middle school… I wish I could bake a cake filled with rainbows and smiles and everyone would eat and be happy…” #

All in all, it seemed to have been written by someone who was rather confused about whether he was one of us or part of a government. After listing all the cost of living problems that people have, he added:

“This tends to stress us out, but we are dealing with it.”

Did he mean that these stress the average person out, or did he mean that he was leading a government of stressed out minister and backbenchers who are doing their best with a limited intellect?

He explained that “we” wanted to take care of the environment because it was “where we live and play”. (No, I’m not kidding.) But we’re not going to sign up to “destroy our economy”  because of the “extreme” views of some. Yes, coal and gas will be around for “a while” but eventually renewables will have a greater role, “so let’s just have a sensible plan and get on with it”.

Awesome. We have a PM who has concluded that we need a sensible plan. Well, that’s a great start after energy policy has caused the Liberals so much angst. At least we have someone who’s realised that a plan would be a good start, and a sensible one would be even better.

After telling us that we all want hospitals and education to be well funded, he added that we already pay enough taxes. Of course, he had told us that we get annoyed at those who dodge them, but his conclusion is to ensure that the government doesn’t waste money and to ensure that the economy is running well. He didn’t seem to want to talk about people dodging tax.

“And we’ve been around long enough to know that it’s not only about the money. Give me a good teacher for my kids over a new school hall any day.”  This is code for don’t come and ask for any money because I gave it all to the private system just before Christmas, because it seemed to be about the money to them. People in the public system should just be content knowing they can have the best teachers, so they don’t need new buildings… Of course, NOT having a new school hall doesn’t actually raise the quality of the teachers, so it’s a rather interesting choice our PM offers.

Interestingly, when he talks about immigration, he tells us that those who hate don’t speak for him. For the rest of the article, it’s all been about “we” or “us”, so apparently, he feels a bit of a loner when talking about hatred. Whatever, migrants helped build this country, and we all get along and we need to keep it that way.

Yes, as Scottie reminds us: “We’d be a pretty dull lot without Australians from so many peoples from so many different backgrounds, starting with our indigenous Australians who were here first and who we respect.”

Yep, we better not forget those indigenous Australians. Mentioned them after several paragraphs talking about immigration. Tick. We’ve acknowledged their were here first. Tick. We respect them. Tick. What more do they want?

There were two other things I found instructive. First, when Morrison told us that he wouldn’t be dragged to the left or right or intimidated by the “shouting”, he added; “I’ve always had my feet firmly planted in the same place they’ve always been.”

In other words, I never move. Or change.

But it was his repetition of the “a fair go for those who have a go” slogan that got me really thinking. When you say it quickly, it sounds… Well, just silly. However, when you stop and actually think about it for a moment, you realise the implication. If it’s only a fair go for those having a go, it means that those who – for whatever reason – aren’t “having a go”, then they don’t get a fair go. And, if they’re not getting a fair go, doesn’t that suggest that there’s something unfair there.

Or to put it another way, if you’re not getting a fair go, then it’s because you’re not having a go, and that’s why inequality exists and it’s really your own fault because if you were having a go, you’d be getting a go. After all, the best form of welfare is a job and if you don’t have one it must be because you’re not having a go.

Gees, cobber, I thought that in Australia, we believed that everyone should get a fair go. Perhaps, our PM isn’t as fair dinkum as he pretends to be.

#For those who don’t get the reference:

61 comments

Login here Register here
  1. Yvonne Robertson

    I reckon the photo is from a SloMo family reunion. There’s more than a passing resemblance.

  2. Josephus

    Brilliant , bitter satire, except that it employs not so much satire as simply quotations.
    Shambles. Vacuity. Populism. As for wasting money, what about the NAIF insanity? The Adani madness? How do these people get into power? How about an IQ test.
    ‘Positive outlook’: the Chinese are good at manufacturing that, thanks to their ID cards, without whose tick no education for the children or decent jobs for parents.
    Let’s all be happy clappy. I need a cup of soma.

  3. Rossleigh

    Well, Yvonne, the caption did say, “Scott Morrison on his family holiday at Shoalhaven Head”, so maybe his relatives were the only ones prepared to be photographed with him…

  4. David Bruce

    … and ScuMo wonders why we have a lack of trust in political leaders, political parties and government in Australia. Speaking out of both sides of his mouth.

    With policies like mandatory vaccinations, the Australian Government could end up with a class action worse then the Thalidomide disaster, with the number of cases of autism, linked to vaccination, around the world!

  5. David Evans

    Close the door on the way out morrison……And fumigate your office, it smells of horse shit.

  6. Kaye Lee

    That is an extremely irresponsible thing to say David Bruce. There is NO link between autism and vaccinations. The one paper suggesting there was, was written by a guy (Wakefield) who was being paid by the attorneys of a few families who wanted to sue pharmaceutical companies and he was banned from practising medicine because of the harm he had caused to children.

  7. Florence Howarth

    PM, I for one is sick of you & your govt telling one & all what to think of Labor. Sick of the patronizing manner towards those who disagree or criticize your govt. I am a little confused 😕 who you are accusing of telling us what to do.

    I note his Australians from all walks of life include no women, no young people, no disabilities, no aged.

  8. jaq Lane

    I wrote on Scummos page that the only reason he was in Vanutu was because the Chinese have put millions into the infrastructure there, and now they have made murmurings that they’d like a military presence there. As I think we, and all those Pacific Islanders recall, his BFF Dutton was caught out laughing about the plight of small Pacific Nations like Kiribati going underwater due to rising sea levels – viz a v Climate Change. He then wrote a statement:
    “The links between people, communities, educators and students, sporting groups and churches in Australia and Vanuatu are longstanding and extensive. They are the ties that bind us. We want to build on those links and make them stronger. Read more in my joint statement with the Prime Minister of Vanuatu at: https://www.pm.gov.au/…/joint-statement-prime-”

    ….which of course is a total crock- as NO PM from Australia has been in Vanuatu for 30 years. And now he’s allowing Kava to be imported? Plus he’s now committing funds to help with programs in Vanuatu to tackle Climate Change, supposedly to help rinse out the bad taste left by the LNP Coolaide- but hold on? Climate Change? Isn’t Climate Change just something those shouty voices from social media keep on jabbering on about? We don’t need any programs to deal with Climate Change in Australia- because it doesn’t exist- but it does for small Pacific Nations?

    The man is so full of shite, I really find it hard to keep up. I’m with you Josephus – we need all these people to take an IQ test before they are allowed to be considered a representative of the people- not that anyone voted for this wanker. I’d also like to see them hook up to electrodes that give them a shock every time they lie. And yes David Evans- fumigate his office, and the whole Parliamentary building- it reeks of horse shit.

  9. Zathras

    It’s a bit late to try and rebrand and market himself as being cuddly and friendly when you look at this bit of undeniable history –

    How Scott Morrison voted on key issues since 2006:

    Voted AGAINST –
    Same sex marriage.
    Tobacco plain packaging.
    A carbon price.
    Increasing scrutiny of asylum seeker management.
    Increasing Trade Unions’ powers in the workplace.
    The Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme.
    A minerals resource rent tax .
    Increasing protection of Australia’s fresh water.
    Increasing marine conservation.
    Restricting foreign ownership.
    Increasing investment in renewable energy.
    Increasing Aboriginal land rights.
    Increasing funding for university education.
    Decreasing the private health insurance rebate.
    Extending government benefits to same-sex couples.
    Carbon farming.
    Re-approving/ re-registering agvet chemicals.
    Increasing restrictions on gambling.
    Increasing fishing restrictions.
    Increasing consumer protections.
    Increasing public access to government data.
    An NBN (using fibre to the premises).
    Implementing refugee and protection conventions.
    Increasing the age pension.

    Voted FOR –
    Decreasing ABC and SBS funding.
    Live animal exports.
    Decreasing the availability of welfare payments.
    The Intervention in the Northern Territory.
    Increasing competition in bulk wheat export.
    Recognising local government in the Constitution.
    Temporary protection visas.
    Unconventional gas mining.
    Privatising government assets.
    Increasing the price of subsidised medicine.
    Increasing or removing the debt limit.

    Has never voted on an emissions reduction fund and voted a mixture of for and against the regional processing of asylum seekers.

    What’s that saying about “Ye shall know them by their fruits…”?

  10. Paul Davis

    With policies like mandatory vaccinations, the Australian Government could end up with a class action worse then the Thalidomide disaster, with the number of cases of autism, linked to vaccination, around the world!

    NO NO NO

    David Bruce could you please provide some evidence for this statement or if you live in Byron Bay we understand…..

  11. Peter F

    David Bruce, All that you show by your campaign against vaccination is that you did not live through the Polio epidemic of the ’50s.

    Unfortunately, nor did many, until vaccination came along.

  12. Kronomex

    Andrew Wakefield

    “In 2004, then-editor Dr. Richard Horton of the Lancet wrote that Wakefield should had revealed to the journal that he had been paid by attorneys seeking to file lawsuits against vaccine manufacturers.[15] In television interviews, Horton claimed that Wakefield’s research was “fatally flawed.”[16] Most of the co-authors of the study retracted the interpretation in the paper[17], and in 2010, The Lancet formally retracted the paper itself.[18]” from

    https://www.historyofvaccines.org/content/articles/do-vaccines-cause-autism

    Other articles –

    https://www.healio.com/pediatrics/vaccine-preventable-diseases/news/print/infectious-diseases-in-children/%7B24b5933b-b212-4b86-b170-d8097c205a64%7D/wakefield-study-linking-mmr-vaccine-autism-uncovered-as-complete-fraud

    https://www.vox.com/2018/2/27/17057990/andrew-wakefield-vaccines-autism-study

    Charlatan.

  13. Matters Not

    Re:

    live in Byron Bay we understand …

    Not just Byron Bay. There are pockets across Australia (try the Sunshine Coast hinterland as an example) and also across the world. (Often in areas where the head count exceeds the body count by a statistically significant margin.)

    https://www.babygaga.com/top-15-countries-that-dont-vaccinate-their-babies/

    But like all generalisations, they should be treated with extreme caution. It’s a clear case of child cruelty.

  14. Steve Flora

    Kaye Lee and Peter F …. Both very valuable comments. The anti-vaccination people just do not seem to realize what danger they are playing around with. My 80-year-old uncle … who had polio between the agres of about 9 and 14 …. and since that time has never/never had the use of his legs is my guiding light for indicating the importance of vaccinations.

  15. roger hawcroft

    Rossleigh, I have no regard for our current Prime Minister nor the LNP and its ideology. However, if you choose to critcise someone else’s use of language, vis. “…and that it was just a few “angry noisy voices” (sic. Where’s the comma between the adjectives?” you would do well to ensure that you don’t, yourself, fail to use it correctly.

    “However, when you stop and actually think about it for a moment, you realise the inference. If it’s only a fair go for those having a go,…” The inappropriate, indeed, wrong use of ‘infer’ as opposed to ‘imply’, or vice versa, is common and, in your sentence, you have joined those who are guilty of it. Corrrectly, that part of your sentence should read: “… you realise the implication.”

    It is wise to come from a position of strength if you wish to deride or criticise someone else.

  16. Vikingduk

    So their Rossleigh you have bin told the rite way to punk tu ate and I hope you speling will be critiss sized next you have bin told and you must respek rogers rant commas are very important and they wil feel abused an miss treeted

  17. Peter F

    Steve, my late uncle had polio in the 1930s, and was only able to walk because his mother spent hours every day for years(literally) massaging his muscles.(There was a Sister Kenny who advocated treatment which was the forerunner of Physiotherapy.) This was well before the epidemic of the late ’40s and early ’50s. Some of my school mates caught polio then, and EVERYONE lined up for their Polio jabs when they became available at our school.

  18. Cool Pete

    Firstly, thank you, Kaye Lee, because of vaccinations, this autistic person has reached his mid-40s, and he would rather be able to tell you what day of the week you were born (without consulting a calendar) if you tell him the day, month and year, or recall historical events, and enjoy learning foreign languages and find similarities with English, than have, “Also, (my name) great-grandson of the above,” at Toowong Cemetery (that’s where I want to rest). as people lay flowers on what would have been his birthday.
    If Scotty Mo thinks we are tired of being told what to do, well, we are tired of being kept in the dark about asylum seekers, we are tired of being lied to, and as for forcing Councils to hold citizenship ceremonies on January 26, well, I am delighted that Daniel Andrews wiped the floor with Guy with the latter letting him saunter in due to his horrendous policy agenda! What we want is a referendum asking us if we want to change the date of Australia Day, and if the majority says No, leave it there, but if the majority says Yes, then hold a second one with several possible dates. What we have to be cautious of is, some may vote No not because they feel strongly about it, but they just don’t care when it is or what it means!
    As for the freedom of speech element, freedom of speech means the right to criticise the government without being imprisoned (think Nazi Germany). Poo Lean may never understand this, but if she called a man my father knew in the 1970s a W word (he was a Cypriot) when asking for a hamburger, it would have been served free of charge with added dog shit!

  19. Rossleigh

    Ah, Roger, I stand by my sentence…
    It is, in fact, an inference which we are meant to draw, rather than an implication which would be more explicit.

    Would you have less of a problem if I’d written, “However, when you stop and think about it for a moment, you realise the inference one is meant to draw from this”?

  20. Kronomex

    “There were two other things I found instructive. First, when Morrison told us that he wouldn’t be dragged to the left or right or intimidated by the “shouting”, he added; “I’ve always had my feet firmly planted in the same place they’ve always been.””

    Yep, one foot in his mouth and the other up his arse. One helps to block oxygen intake to his brain and the other helps with the build up of shit which he then spouts when he removes the mouth foot to speak.

  21. jaq Lane

    Kronomex… bahaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa thank you! Your comment re both feet on the ground( stuck in quick drying cement lets hope) made me laugh out loud! Boy, some days with this trash running the circus, you need to laugh!

  22. Baby Jewels

    Well said, Florence.

    Let’s just boot him out and forget this nightmare.

  23. George Theodoridis

    Vikingduk, I thing you made a speeling eror in your speeling. Fergot were thou.

  24. Joseph Carli

    George…very good of you to notify Vikingduk, but as I have already advised him..there is a missplaced consonant in his name…We know the one.

  25. Roger Hawcroft

    Rossleigh, you are wrong as your attempt at a defense even shows.

    Only the receiver can infer.

    The deliverer implies.

    The level of relevance has nothing to do with the definitions of infer or imply.

    You write in your mistaken defence: “It is, in fact, an inference which we are meant to draw …” thus supporting what the explanation I have given, that the receivers are those that will make the inference.

    You go on to ask whether I would “have less of a problem if I’d (you had) written, “however, when yuo stop and think about if for a moment, you realise the inference one is meant to draw from this”? The answer is that I would have no problem with that because, yet again, you reinforce the correct use of infer by attaching it to the receivers.

    In your original article, however, you wrote: “But it was his repetition of the “a fair go for those who have a go” slogan that got me really thinking. When you say it quickly, it sounds… Well, just silly. However, when you stop and actually think about it for a moment, you realise the inference.”

    In other words, you are suggesting that if the reader thinks for a moment, they will realise what the PM is inferring. If the PM was inferring then he would be a receiver of information, not the supplier of it. In being the supplier of it, he is implying, not inferring.

    I am surprised that you choose to defend the indefensible, particularly as you miss the main point of my raising the error, which was not pedantry but, as I explained, the mistake of being derisive of a grammatical error by another whilst making a significant one yourself. As I said, it leave you open to similar criticism or, in your case, derision.

    I also, in general terms, support your view of our Prime Minister’s performance and misleading, even at times delusional, statements about various issues of concern to our nation, though I’m not particularly impressed by what, in this case, was little more than mud-slinging and basically puts your article into the same bin as most of those written by the equally derisive supporters of the LNP and the PM. I feel sure that you are capable of a much more subtle and creative demolition of Scott Morrison’s publicly aired views than you made here.

    Should you still not be prepared to admit your error gracefully and to learn from it, I will be disappointed and can only suggest that you consider an acknowledged expert in the field of English grammar. Here is the insight one such notable expert, H.W.Fowler:

    “infer eg. ‘You clearly infer that your policy was influenced to some extent by your feeling of loyalty to the Labour Government.” – This misuse of i. (infer) for imply is sadly common – so common that some dictionaries give imply as one fo the definitions of infer
    without comment. But each word has its own job to do, one at the giving end and the other at the receiving. (What do you imply by that remark? What am I to infer from that remark?) and should be left to do it without interference.”

    Of course, there will be other readers who will miss the point and who will jump online to deride me by implying pedantry, both because of their own ignorance and because of the high status you hold with readers of AIMN. The puerile comment by Vikingduk is an example. There will also be those who will support your refusal to acknowledge an error or even take on board the positive manner and reason for which I brought it to your notice because it was I that did it.

    Unfortunately, there is much very poor comment on AIMN that, in my view, lets down what is an important role with impeccable aims. However, whenever I have had the temerity to raise issues with such content, I have been ‘put in my place’ in no uncertain terms. For that very reason I gave some thought to actually pointing out this error and contradiction in the context of your article. Obviously, yet again, I made the wrong decision and (metaphorically) opened my mouth.

    However, for once, I will not apologise for attempting to contribute to lifting the standard of commentary and response on AIMN. If this site cannot do better than the mainstream media then it fails in its aims. I don’t wish to see that happen.

  26. Kaye Lee

    “Unfortunately, there is much very poor comment on AIMN”

    I must disagree. I enjoy the commentary on the AIMN. We are not submitting academic essays – just people having a chat. And, in the main, the commenters here are far better informed than the general public. This type of writing allows us certain literary liberties, like starting a sentence with a conjunction.

  27. Joseph Carli

    I have to agree with Roger…not only in the amount of poor comment, but recently also in the poor quality of articles posted…some of which are little more than the “stating of the bleedin’ obvious” headlines of the day…and I would point out that Howcroft’s comments are usually of a greater depth of thought and consideration, so much more worthy than…well, for instance..Vikingduk’s silly stabs at (and missing by a wide berth)wit….

  28. Michael Taylor

    Roger, it is very hard at times to find a balance … a something for everyone. Instead, there is something for everyone.

    It was not long ago that I was mocked for writing an article that came across as too ‘academic’.

    We are not professional writers … we are just people having a say.

  29. Michael Taylor

    Joe, I strongly disagree in regards to the quality of articles. As the site owner, I am proud to have them all published here.

  30. Kaye Lee

    Joseph,

    As I have said before, we all have different reading tastes. I am uncertain why you would choose to bag a site that has given you such opportunity.

    I very much enjoy Rossleigh’s unique ability to see the contradictions and point them out in such an entertaining way.

  31. Rossleigh

    Gee, Roger, I’m glad that I don’t have a “defense”.
    However, my defence was simply that I do know the difference between the two words, and I chose “inference” because we had to draw it for ourselves. It may or may not have been implied by Scott Morrison. He may or may not have meant it. I can’t speak for another human being. However, if you’re going to feel that this is “putting you in your place”, please be assured that didn’t mean to do that and any inference you have drawn to that effect should be reconsidered in the light of this.

  32. Matters Not

    Re religious chaplains in schools and the Labor response via Tanya Plibersek.

    “If elected, Labor will open up the program to give schools the option to choose either a professionally qualified secular student welfare officer or a chaplain,” she said.

    “We believe that principals and school communities are best placed to understand their students’ needs, so Labor will give schools a choice about the services they need and the staff they hire

    She ought to be congratulated. But it’s only a beginning.

    If parents want to religiously indoctrinate their offspring, I can live with that – but not in school time using government money – illegally. After all, it’s a secular State in which we live and presumably that’s how we want it to remain.

  33. Roger Hawcroft

    Rossleigh, a little humility and honesty is much more indicative of worthiness than the continued obstinacy to admit a wrong. I pointed out the different meanings and purpose of the two words but you still insisted on denying that you had misused them.

    This issue has nothing to do with you ‘speaking for another human being’, though that is indeed what you have done and what many do here very often.

    I am sorry that you lack the courage and honesty to live up to your lauded status. I’ll say no more on the matter save that, as I thought, your sycophantic acolytes have, of course, jumped to support you in the unsupportable, just as you chose to defend yourself from the indefensible.

  34. Matters Not

    Roger Hawcroft, I suspect that you have difficulty living with the other – broadly defined.

    By the way, language (including the meaning(s) we give to words) evolves over time. For example, explore the meanings given to decimate and haircut these days.

    Yes I am saying that words only have particular meaning(s) because of human attribution. What humans create – they can also recreate. Such is the power of humans when it comes to language.

  35. Kaye Lee

    Ummm……this “sycophantic accolyte” was expressing her own opinion thanks anyway Roger. If that’s ok of course. Or am I supposed to just agree with you? But wouldn’t that also make me a sycophantic accolyte?

    How about we get back to the thrust of the story. This is getting silly.

  36. Kronomex

    Roger, if you and Joseph don’t like the tone and “quality” of this site then why don’t the pair of you go and start your own blog then you can block anyone that doesn’t come up to your obviously high standards.

    Matters Not, the schools should be charging the religionationists a fee to allow chaplains to show up once a week. Double the fees each time they are caught proselytising. I would much rather see the whole scheme completely removed from the school system and go back to secular counselors.

  37. Matters Not

    Always attracted to this quote:

    “When I use a word,” Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, “it means just what I choose it to mean—neither more nor less.” “The question is,” said Alice, “whether you can make words mean so many different things.” “The question is,” said Humpty Dumpty, which is to be master—that’s all.”

    Yes – are we to be the inheritors of meanings given by others to particular words, or are we free to be the creators? And if so – what are the implications?

    Kronomex re charging fees. I would much prefer that schools did not prostitute themselves. Schools should be about ‘rationality’ and ‘science’ – leaving ‘faith’ for the intellectually challenged.

  38. Joseph Carli

    The moral to Kronomex’s “story”..:

    It works like this .. :

    Every regional community has its’ number of “old families”.. “long-time residents” .. “long-time employees”. Every single one of these people over the years evolve to become part of a strata of acknowledged hierarchical status, ie ; They are allocated their place in that community. Some have a leadership place, some have a “drone” place, some have the inherited if unearned respect of an influential family, while others are what you would call “floaters” ; in and out of favour at some time or other … The perfect example of the Peter Principle .. Then there are the “blow-ins”.

    All of these “old” regional communities seem to thrive on a social diet of rumour, envy and schadenfreude. There are short and long-term feuds, niggling, petty hates and overall the cautious, suspicious envy of what the neighbour may have that you have not .. and if they do have it, how did they get it!

    The level that these petty trysts achieve and are operating on can be seen by the state of beauty or disrepair of the township. Those towns in a greater state of turmoil show little regard for their environment, or for the general civic repair or beauty of their town, being more concerned with their feuds than their civic obligations.

    BUT! .. but, strangely, all these communities, no matter how divided within , will unite against what is perceived as a common outside threat. This unity of concentration is called ;

    The Cabal of Complicity.

    There are, of course, the age-old bigotries against race, religion and politics … Then there are the new hatreds .. : Environmentalists seem to fill the void for a common enemy, as do refugees, strangely as most who came to this country and particularly those regional communities were refugees of one kind or another and there is that lovely old standby distrust .. : The Indigenous Peoples.

    Curiously though, there is another “player” that comes into the picture about now, he is a “blow-in”, a newcomer, but he is saying all the right phrases that appeal to the local prejudices … He pushes all the right approval buttons. This toady targets the most influential to his station and needs. With astute flattery and sycophantic conversation, not to mention the strategic “on me” beer, he soon becomes accepted into the cabal as a “friend of the community”, he “legitimises” local opinion as being “in-tune” with the broader population and is often privy to a host of secrets, while juggling conspiracies and confederacies. He is a strange animal and in most cases a reject of the more cosmopolitan world of city-life.

    This “strange animal” adopts the dress, the language, the scepticisms and the inherent suspicions against that universal political generic : “The head office” … The Guvverment . There being no easier audience to find applause from than that who knows already and shares as their own ; your every story, every joke your every prejudice.

    To enter such communities and hold views in conflict with the status quo (listed above) is to court social pariahism. For although you may be of the opinion that you have just had a “heated discussion” with only one member of the community …. because such a member “went to school with … “, “grew up with … “, “played football with … “, “drank with … “, “did a season shearing with … “, “works with … “, or just plain “is related to … ” , it won’t be long, regardless if the culprit is despised, hated, reviled or spurned by nearly every other single individual in the entire cabal ….. YOU will “have the problem”.

    Because the one grain, perhaps the only grain of carved-in-stone knowledge in such communities is that its very weakness is its’ strength, so each is complicit in backing-up, right or wrong, innocence or guilt, with silent dismissal or wilful disdain, its’ “in-house” member.

    It is the strength of their denial, it is their unifying fear of “divided they fall”, for each individual, lacking a worldly confidence, distrusting worldly knowledge, has no solid footing, but is fixed in the matrix of all .. it is the age-old maxim of “honour among thieves” …. so take on one, you take on all!

    It is The Cabal of Complicity.

  39. Kaye Lee

    The paranoia runs deep here. Time to move on.

  40. Matters Not

    The above is just so middle class. Always a source of much amusement.

    Oh how we laugh – and laugh,

  41. Kronomex

    Matters Not, I left out a word by accident. It should have read: “maybe the schools should be charging the religionationists…” It wouldn’t work anyway because pastor Scummo and his holy rollers would not dare to even make such a suggestion. Faith is not just for the “intellectually challenged”…bloody mosquito…it covers the whole gamut from dunce to genius.

    Time to finish listening to The Scarlet Capsule by The Goons, it was Milligan’s send up of the classic television serial from 1958, Nigel Kneale’s Quatermass and the Pit.

    Holy crap! Make a one sentence comment and Joseph goes way off the deep end. You got all that rubbish from a simple comment? I hate tho think what would happen if it had been a four sentence comment.

    Kaye Lee, agreed it’s almost disturbing in its paranoia.

  42. paul walter

    Very, very sick of Morrison.

  43. Joseph Carli

    There is something that needs to be said..and it needs to be understood as well….These left-wing blogs are an integral part of “The cause” for the spread of left-wing ideals and philosophy…they are also “safe-houses” where many like-minded people can come to refresh their beliefs and to “staunch any loss of heart” after a long campaign battling on that front-line of spreading the good-word…we all can grow weary..and as such, while we can say ; “yes…this blog belongs to this or that persons/persons” , the ideal, the Word, the force that drives so many of us in the one direction to defeat the vanity of self-centered neo-liberal ideals is common property, OUR property and this blog is by that moot agreeance, “common ground”.

    This place of debate is not the sole ownership of this or that person, this or that cabal of “cognoscenti” that indulge in a kind of mutual back-slapping and quaffing of the “vanity wine” of self indulgence. This blog, like so many other left-wing blogs is a refuge where we do some self examination, we also look closely at our cause, our commitment to the philosophy, our mythology, our integrity…We come here to submit ourselves to look deep into our souls with articles that do more than rail tritely against the bleeding obvious…Twitter is there for that if one wishes.

    So while there are those who would call for some like myself to “bugger off” and find another site, it would do well if those that shout too keenly for such to understand that there is no such a thing as “ownership” of an ideal or line of debate or self-professed sanctity in numbers…we many meet in a kind of “kinship” and mutual comeraderie to tell our stories of the fight and to ask each other…”How goes thee, fellow traveller?”…..not : “bugger off fellow fighter…thou share not MY opinion.”

    We of the left are about to be confronted with an election that is going to be perhaps the most vicious in our lifetime…all the traitors of our nation on the right-wing of politics are going to throw everything they have at this election…because they know that if they lose, there WILL BE an ICAC. There WILL BE a host of Royal Commissions..there WILL BE a new Public Prosecutor who will not be hesitant to send those who have plundered and defrauded the public office and its coffers to face trial…THIS moment coming on with this election is a pivotal point in Australian history..win it and the State moves on to a possible resurrection and glory…lose it and we descend into chaos and infamy.

    That is why I, for one haven’t “buggered off”..though I have been many times and by many people advised to….this is why blogs like these MUST BE maintained as safe houses of integrity that give security to the faithful as refuges for serious talk, serious self-examination, exchange of story and song, and yes…even to place on trial those false leads and corrupted ideologies that creep into the common scriptures of the left-wing…This blog is a manifesto of our ideals and not a possession for the few to parade their own vainglorious egos.

    Yes…there was something that needed to be said.

  44. Kaye Lee

    Joseph,

    A little of your own self-reflection wouldn’t go astray. It is your personal attacks on people (and increasingly on this site) that annoys people. You react with aggression which unsurprisingly breeds aggression. You dismiss the work of others but hold your own up as some sort of deep examination of the human psyche. Some enjoy it, Others don’t. That’s ok. You seem to think there is some organised cabal out to get you instead of just people expressing their own point of view.

    It’s all about respect and civility Joe. The site owner sets the rules of behaviour and we are obliged to follow them. Luckily most people here have no trouble with that.

  45. Roger Hawcroft

    Kaye, if it is “all about respect”, the perhaps you should practice what you preach.

    You, as do so many others, very often fail to separate the issue form the individual. Your own prolific commentary on this site is replete with attacks on the person rather than rational and informed argument on the issue. You have done it yet again with your last comment.

    I noticed that you were shown as having made the most comments last year. Perhaps you should think on this quote: “Those who know do not speak. Lao Tsu

    You might also benefit from reading: ” 7 Smart reasons you should talk less and listen more.” https://www.inc.com/minda-zetlin/7-reasons-why-its-smart-to-listen-more-than-you-talk.html

    If you are right about this being a place for people to just chat and if, as it seems, you are in accord with those who fall back on one or another version of the specious: “if you don’t like it, bugger off” type of response, then you do neither yourself nor the cause of equity no favours.

    It is a common ploy of those who can’t match an argument or are unwilling or immodest enough to be able to acknowledge when they are wrong, for them to back out by suggesting that those involved should move on.

    Michael has indicated that he wishes to give everyone a voice and, by implication, that he at times will tolerate tone or sentiment with which he doesn’t agree or that he feels is inappropriate. I can respect that view. However, at the same time, my understanding – at least when Michael first established the site and before it received its grotesque header, was that its aim was to promote honest and open reporting and discussion of political issues. I was never given to believe that it was a place for ‘chatting’ or ‘sycophantic drivel’.

    ‘Independent media’, to be worthy of the title, must in my view be ‘better than’ and ‘more accurate and intelligible’ than is the majority of the mainstream media. Part of that, consists of understanding the language and being capable of using it correctly. The notion that words can mean anything you want them to mean is farcical. No sensible, rational nor logical argument or discussion can be head if each individual has a different interpretation of the meaning of a word or words. Yes, of course language changes and evolves over time. I don’t dispute that. However, that it does so is not the equivalent of free rein for all and sundry to use, misuse or make up use of it. Such an argument is one I hear often but that it is repeated ad infinitum does not make it correct. Indeed, that very repetition of nonsense is so often how falsities become accepted as facts and adopted by the majority of the community. That acceptance does not change the invalidity of those falsities.

    If, as as implied by what most contributors here have to say, the general feeling is one of opposition to neo-liberalist economics and a government ideology that puts money, big business, and even self-interest before the best interests of the community, then the standard of contributions, discussion, argument and interpretation on the site needs significant improvement.

    If that is not the case and if Michael is really happy for it to be a largely uninformed hotch-potch of derisive commentary, pathetic satirical failures and general mutual congratulation and sycophantic approbation, the so be it. If that be the case then there is no need for the unkind and derogatory instructions that contributors such as Joseph or myself should “bugger off” because inevitably, sooner or later we will see that there is nothing to be gained by trying to build a strong and credible independent new source when many, if not most, of its main contributors are so conceited that they can accept no criticism; that they cannot follow an argument and clearly have little understanding of what constitute the concepts of rationality and logic and why they are important. The result will be that they and those like them will leave of their own accord.

    I sincerely hope that such is not what Michael wants for I have much respect for him and the work and effort he has put into this site. I also strongly believe that we need more sites were sound argument and views are put forward and lies and fallacies are exposed, but childlike mud-slinging and derisory name-calling, I can do without. So, for the immediate future I will stand back and observe and you may or may not hear from me again. I’m certain that such will please many of you.

  46. Kaye Lee

    Oh Roger, you make me chuckle.

  47. Michael Taylor

    Roger, our apologies for your comment being held in moderation. There was an “s” missing in your email address (which I have corrected) and the system thought you were a new commenter. All new commenters are held in moderation.

    Yes, the header is grotesque, and replacing it is the next job on my to-do list. (Admittedly, it’s been on my to-do list for a while but something else always pops up).

    Now, I’ll defend Kaye if I may. I gain as much from her comments as I do with her articles. She engages with everybody, which is something I should do more of. But I have much respect for her, and I feel as though she is speaking for me.

    I’ll also add that Kaye is never the first to attack a person. She responds to attacks on herself, other commenters, and this site. I wish I had her style. Sadly, I either blow a fuse or run and hide.

    Nonetheless, I respect and appreciate that you hold The AIMN in such high regard.

  48. Rossleigh

    In the spirit of helping everyone to get along and to help make a cake of rainbows, I have changed the word “inference” to “implication”.

  49. Kaye Lee

    Throws rose petals in the air and hands out olive branches.

    Pax vobiscum.

  50. Adrianne Haddow

    Rossleigh, love your work. Keep it up. You and First Dog on the Moon make my week bearable, and the loonies in government more laughable.
    Laughing in the face of adversity and hypocrisy keeps us sane, and is, I consider, one of the fundamental ‘Australian values’.
    ( I hope all my commas are in the right place, and the rogue apostrophes don’t show me up as ungrammarly or punctuation poor).

    Kaye Lee, I admire your writing and research, and your patient engagement with the ‘slings and arrows’ of disgruntled commenters. And they have been fast and furious over the last couple of weeks. So much so, that after a quick scan of the articles, I scan the comments thread to see if it’s ‘a get Kaye Lee’ day, before I engage.

    Dare I mention Tall Poppies?

    That said, I appreciate the AIMN and all who make positive contributions to discussion, whether I agree with them or not.

  51. paul walter

    Good work from Kaye Lee, but a couple of people need to take a long look in the mirror instead of presenting vacuous waste as substitute for thought out comment.

    Adrianne nails with that astute “Tall Poppies” observation.

    Back on topic, we observe the neglected headline that Kelly O’Dwyer is retiring from parliament.

    Perhaps she is a myopic lefty also?

    Or has she finally had enough of the imbecility of Abbott, Dutton, Morrison and others from her class, the naughty boys club with peashooters at the back of the room.

    Keep winning through objective writing and don’t doubt that we can’t see through the adhominems of envious malcontents.

  52. Matters Not

    Kelly O’Dwyer is making the right call and at the right time. Nothing worse than being an ex-Minister on the Opposition benches – without staff, limousine, driver, accompanied by reduced salary and having to suffer the slings and arrows from a rampant and arrogant new frontbench. The indignity of it all. Far better to be doing other things – with pension guaranteed and a cushy private sector position there for the taking. Besides, there was always the prospect of an electoral defeat. Now that would be humiliating.

    Of course she could make a comeback in 8 years time when the political winds have reversed. In the shorter term, Morrison should thank her for her service and the relieve her of all duties. After all he has a perfectly good candidate waiting in the wings to succeed her as Minister for Women. It’s a job he’s done before and with some distinction..

  53. DrakeN

    “So, for the immediate future I will stand back and observe and you may or may not hear from me again. I’m certain that such will please many of you.” Roger Hawcroft.

    Great news.
    Your arrogant hypocrisy is of the kind which I wish to avoid wherever practicable.

    I’m a relative newcomer to this site, but not to the wider world and I find your superciliousness irritating in the extreme.

  54. Joseph Carli

    One only has to wait a while and the physics is proven…: The scum..always floats to the top.

  55. DrakeN

    Likewise the cream, Joseph.

  56. Kaye Lee

    Look, we are all on the same side here in wanting to change the government. Some people like what we write, some don’t. Sometimes we agree, sometimes we don’t. Luckily there is a variety of styles so people can choose what they read and what they don’t.

    Bickering is wearing for all of us and serves no useful purpose. It is the same mistake that the political parties are making…forgetting what is important as we argue about trivialities.

    Rossleigh’s article makes important points, as he always does, in a very entertaining way. His unique talent to make us laugh when we really want to cry is invaluable. He is a great asset to this site.

    Let’s get back to the topic.

  57. paul walter

    Well, I can handle Joseph Carli, who at least has some idea of the ideas thing, but who is this walking desert that is “Roger Hawcraft”?

  58. paul walter

    Btw, how dare an authoritarian like Promo gripe about other people telling HIM what to do? His rudeness is only exceeded by his asininity.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Return to home page
Scroll Up
%d bloggers like this: