We need better outcomes. But how?
We receive a lot of mail at The AIMN, but this suggestion from one of our readers struck a chord:
“As we are facing one of the most important and influential challenges both for humanity and the earth itself, perhaps it is time we stopped reacting and started directing our thinking and our philosophies toward new ways: Ways that are supportive, direct and empowered. You have the vision to see the truth yet you express it their way, by attacking, dividing and conquering. Let’s stand united, point out the obvious and change the minds of those masses that also reacting instead of using them as ‘weapons of our own demise’ (Christie Parrish). Now is an opportunity to work around the old systems as they fall. Do we really want to take their divisive ways forward with us? As an advocate for change and a leader in new ways of reporting, the choice is yours.
Methods have a great place but they can also impede independent thinking and progress. Diversity and personal responsibility can only be expressed once we review our reactions and then seek another way forward. Just as the systems of governance, The AIMN is run by people: People sharing their opinions, ideas and philosophical questions eagerly with others. Perhaps more discussion will eventually lead us all to more respectful and tolerant ways of communication.”
This astute reader neatly summed up Australian media: On one side of the coin we have the mainstream media telling us how good the federal government is, and on the other side of the coin we have independent media telling us how bad the government is. The irony is that we’re on the same coin. And we need to get off it.
True, independent media holds the government to account and we need to keep doing this, but let’s also turn our focus to outcomes, instead of actions and behaviours.
For example, we all know that climate change is going to make ours a harsher planet to live on for our children and grandchildren and we regularly condemn the federal government for their lack of action, while adding suggestions on what should be done to address climate change.
However, we need to be elaborating on the outcomes of affirmative action. And not just with climate change.
For example, what would be the positive outcomes if hospitals had more funding? What would be the positive outcomes for Australian businesses and families if we had a better NBN? What would the positive outcomes be if we opened our borders for more refugees? A lot of the answers would sound obvious, but we need to make them more convincing if we want to change the mindset of a country that seems to be at a very stagnant stage.
This reader makes a lot of sense, and her thoughts were appreciated.
Your thoughts, too, would be appreciated.
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!
442 total views, 2 views today
29 commentsLogin here Register here
I like this way of thinking, though it’s not something I can respond to until I researched a bit about what outcomes can be achieved by such and such current action.
Excellent. I enjoy opening up Pandora’s box… Stirring the pot… Tear down conventional institutionalised thoughts!
“On one side of the coin we have the mainstream media telling us how good the federal government is, and on the other side of the coin we have independent media telling us how bad the government is. The irony is that we’re on the same coin. And we need to get off it.”
Yep, two sides of the same coin. The coin remains unbalanced, and will fall over on to one side and not go anywhere.. Lying flat.
BUT whereas a coin that is balanced will stand upright on it’s edge and will effortlessly roll along. It’s going places…
So IMHO the main problem with mankind is how we think, well those that think at all that is.. ha ha ha.
Which aren’t very many, when one thinks about it, lol, because if people really were able to think for themselves, well we wouldn’t be in such a mess eh, but most people do not think for themselves.. Now why is that? Well I think most people are incapable of actual original thought, folks go along with what are considered the right ways to think. Which are? Religions!
This is what people who reject religion fail to understand when they call themselves agnostic or atheist. It’s still a belief that gods exist just that they don’t believe in them, such constrains new ideas, because it’s just the other side of the same coin.
This is the terminology used by people who reject theism, a belief in the existence of a god or gods, a creator of the universe.
I hold religion(s) responsible for hindering, impeding the awareness, the growth of mankind’s understanding of all the universe.
Religion holds us all back, robs mankind of free original thought. Religion is the direct cause of mankind’s inability to evolve past the thoughts of an immature childlike state, fanciful in beliefs of fairies, ghosts, ghouls and whatnots, other fanciful imaginations.
Mankind is basically unable to grow up. Minds held back from the cradle to the grave with propaganda of religious claptrap.
Sure there are those who are venturing out past the edge of the universe, past the black matter, to a more fuller understanding.
But the vast majority of mankind remain ignorant, and deluded by all the charlatans and crooks who are in “power” over us.
The despots, the fascists, the dictatorial madmen, all the ‘royalty’ that have stolen the commonwealth of men and women.
I don’t believe in any form of religion or of gods, and so religious people label me agnostic or atheist. I’m none of that shit.
This is so they can feel secure in their nonsensical thoughts of religion. Religious people have to have a box for all thoughts.
It never occurs to religious people that there is another way of thought that has zero to do with any gods or creation ideas.
I reject all such thoughts, ideas or forms of religion, spirituality, crystals, mindfulness, tarot cards, and other such like crap!!!
There we go, that should stir up the faithful, the mindless, all those who believe, thrive on cults and ripping folks off. 😁
This is exactly what the astute reader has neatly summed up..
We need an entirely new beginning, not just about media, but about all life itself. About all philosophies.. Start again…
Sadly, such won’t happen in my lifetime.. How many more lifetimes will be wasted, blown up, massacred, mutilated.
And the centuries drift on by… Another year shot to hell… And people still steal and fight, the need to kill each other.. Why?
That creationists believe this earth was created in 7 days a few thousand years ago, that so many hold this belief as an absolute truth is what is holding back all mankind, why we remain as children, squabbling, fighting, greedy, selfish, scared of life itself.
Things are changing, but all too slowly, there are still so many indoctrinated by world wide religious nonsense. Propaganda.
And here in Australia we have a PM who believes in “miracles”, gonna walk on water eh, and chats with a ‘god’ in gibberish.
We have the hypocrisy of a “lords prayer”, a fictitious fallacy, before parliament sits down to consider our countries well being.
Our father who is in “heaven”… blah blah blah, FFS!, As if anyone even remotely follows the supposed 10 commandments!
So what’s “heaven” anyway… Oh yes , up there, them pearly gates eh… FFS!
But here in Australia we are far from unique, most of the world is mad with religion, and 74 million voted for Trump in the US.
Who knows what lies beyond the furthest reaches of the vastness of the cosmos, what arrogance to assume we know.
The same arrogance that holds that any other form of alien lifeform is impossible, that earth is the center of everything.
That some people still think the earth is flat, that everything revolves around the earth. Too many minds still live in the ‘cave’.
Indeed we need a whole new way of thinking, not bound, hemmed in, impeded by our old ways of thinking… Religion… BAH!
Mankind is so incredibly innovative when it comes to technology, but when it comes to morals and ethics we are fucked!
Ok then, some thoughts, appreciated or not…
We need to replace religion – based on the belief in one or more gods – with an ethical frame for life based on treating others as we wish to be treated.
And we need to recognise that this is hard.
The scurrilous posts on this site speak of angry impotence .Gandhi, the Quakers, they differ; they speak truth to power. The only problem is that governments have the sole right to kill dissidents.
Our good suffer. Cf Assange, flawed but principles. Cf Jesus , who said something about rich men, needle eyes and heaven.
Peaceful trespass and non violent demonstrations are being punished. Despair seems rational . Candide: “ we can only dig our gardens”. In dictatorships bitter jokes flourish. Are we reduced to that ? Yes dear pm thanks, we are not being shot, as you kindly reminded us on 15 March.
You are only destroying what most people believe in. ICAC now.
It sounds a whole lot like tone policing, with a side of victim blaming.
We know what the outcomes of responsible government are: better and fairer health and education systems; more efficient use of financial resources; cleaner air, cleaner water, healthier ecosystems, healthier food, so less strain on health systems; (add a fewe hundred etcs).
We know, and we’ve been telling both the general populace and them upstairs, but they don’t believe, don’t care or don’t want to know.
Being nice and quiet and polite never changed anything.
I did write a detailed comment just before, but the internet dropped out just before I pushed the “post” button and I lost the lot…bugger!…but the gist was that left-wing social media is hamstrung by this recent demand from what I see as the more bourgoise element “on site” for a incandescent obedience to identity politics…du jour…and it is that weakness of concentrating on singular issues ad infinitum and in singulus that lets those controlling personalities direct the consensus of the site down blind alley paths..and gives the right-wing a dead-easy job of driving a wedge into the heart of Labor. We (of the left) need to revitalise the Grand Ideal of the Left..with articles calling for more radical direction by our representatives, a more inclusive representation within the political ranks of the now varied ethnic communities and a better reading of the histories and influence of those ethnicities in the migrant development of Aust’
In place of that lost piece before, I post this response I made a long time ago about the failing of the Left.
Failure of the Left.
The greatest failure of The Left, is to have become “intellectualised”..so that now it is a de-unionised political debating to oblivion machine. People pointed to John Setka & said THERE is the problem..HE is a brute..It is not the likes of Setka who is brutish, HE is a protector. Setka was no more brutish than Castro or Che Guevara was brutish when all the time they were protecting those who suffered at the hands of bastards the likes of Howard who operated political cruelty levers behind the anonymity of The State Authorities..The Left talks too much these days and considers too little.
The “intellectual” Left knows how to debate left-wing philosophy but cannot sell it to those who need it most…hence The LNP gets voted back in so many times..because the right-wing does NOT align itself with its base in an intellectual manner, but rather in a cultural manner. And it is cultural identification that brings people together to support the one ideal, the one principle & the one goal that is common to them all..Howard used base fear and base racism.. Tampa and “children overboard”…Consider Eddie Mabo’s people who stood alone for ten years in the bush with nothing but their strength of cultural camaraderie.
Cultural identity is what makes a people..ANY PEOPLE, be they of any nation suffering under the oppression of colonialism to withstand, if deeply committed to their culture, centuries of cruelty..it has made the indigenous tribes of Aust’ withstand & now, hopefully, conquer their oppressors. We multi-cultural citizens of Australia need to reclaim our heritage cultures and then to unite to make this a culturally diverse yet singular ideal directed nation…Fuck the free-market destroyers of everything culturally decent..everything community sympathetic..but most of all, we need to identify with an over-riding, connecting arc of mutual beneficence.
We need super strong unionism!
I post articles, poetry, stories on several sites on social media…My own blog, Trish Corry’s blog, Facebook, Twitter…I used to on here..and on each site, I have learned the strengths and weaknesses of those individual sites…so have many others who go to those same sites to read, post or comment…it doesn’t take long to get the gist and direction wanted or demanded by each site…on twitter for instance, regardless of the owner’s moderation..there is an overall demand that you adhere to certain “yes-yesses” whilst avoid certain “no-no’s”…and it can be seen that certain “gravitar personalities” have a greater influence than the common poster and these “identities” can steer the conversation in all sorts of ways by simply directing a tweet this way or that…
This is the problem with a continuety of regular posters, their political preferences or originality are soon exhausted and their sometimes tiresome rhetoric joins others of similar opinions and a cabal is formed which has the danger of being viewed as the “site opinion de rigueur” .
The attraction of new commentators with a fresh set of eyes is needed to change direction and inject new ideas into an older generation..This can be done by encouraging young writers to participate through a..say..monthly competition for “best article” (on selected subjects that promote leftish politics/history etc..) or promoting radical opinions on Twitter or other affiliated blog-sites…which I suspect is in some ways a common, if benign practice already…or a site could align itself with concentrating on an ambition toward higher Left-wing ideals and promote itself on that basis, thereby luring writers of qualification on such topics to the site.
On a slightly different matter, we’ve a huge fight on our hands.
Frydenberg’s amendment to the media bargaining code is due to be tabled in the new year. If it passes, it will mean that Facebook and Google will only be able to publish articles by the Murdoch media, the Kerry Stokes media, and Fairfax/Channel 9.
It is the government’s way of shutting out independent or dissenting media just in time for the election campaign.
A word that comes to mind to describe this is ‘fascism’.
I will have more on this later in the week.
Your fears, Michael do not surprise me in the least…I said before the 2016 Fed’ election that with all the underhand deals done by the Abbott regiem, the LNP cannot afford the risk of criminal prosecution if they get voted out of office…and it is even more imperative now for their own and their backer’s legal health that they remain in power…there were some quite dodgy electoral “happenings” in the last two elections incl’ the couple last time that were defeated in the Federal Court by of all authorities ; The AEC …DEFENDING The LNP!!??….and I have yet to see the Aust’ National Audit Office report on the AEC’s running of the 2019 Fed’ election….I am beginning to doubt there will be one!
The recent upping of the ante of right-wing radicalism in Aust’ of late has to be ordained by a higher power than those media-queen wankers we saw on the nightly news…but with the likes of “Spud” Dutto’ running the show, how can we be surprised…There’s less chance of THIS gov’t getting water-aircraft for the coming fire season than of them getting water-cannons ready for the next election results.
I have sent an email to my local member.. Fiona Philips.. Gilmore.. Labor.
To ask what is she, and Labor doing about Frydenberg’s amendment to the media bargaining code..
I’ll post the response when I get one…
Over 30 independent media sites and regional newspapers have joined as one to oppose this.
Later this week or early next week we’ll be publishing an article simultaneously appealing to the public to lobby their local member to oppose this amendment.
Joe, a lot of political watchers keep predicting an early election, but I see the amendments to the media bargaining code as a sign that the government won’t go to the polls until the amendment is pushed through.
That’s my guess. And I do have a history of guessing wrong.
If I’m given a choice of boxes and one had $50 in it and the other had five cents, 99% of the time I’d pick the wrong box.
Or as BB would say: “Damn. I should have played that shot with the 5-iron.”
Is their justification that they have to stop “cancel culture”?
For a start, michael, your ‘she’ sets the tone of being ignored like grace tame?
Women are vital in resolving conflicts started by religious men and their women. They will stop the church.
Sadly the church and our government selects their women on principles. The former believes god made women for a purpose and the latter accepts that some women are exceptional to that purpose. Although the men with wombs make up half of society. few consider themselves as equal participants in the workings of that society and most men agree. Some men, having been lucky enough to see the power of women and read the history of women working under war conditions, realise that equality is the best we can hope for. Their worth is quickly forgotten when men in government force them back into womb men conditions. Sadly, the christian image of laying on your back and thinking of england is the tails of the coin whilst men have the winning heads. So lets get a mobius mentality or, at least, mint a new coin.
Spot on, joe, I will forget where the government got its cash and where climate got its demise..
michael make three boxes to increase your odds.
Now that everyone knows about boobbies disastrous fit of pique destruction of climate action there is no need to remind the loonies here of their well hidden responsible for 12 years of inaction.
ps michael if you have nothing, 5c and $50???
it is unfair to blame “boobbie” Brown for “a disastrous fit of pique” when the real “fit” was the reaction from voters in Queensland who have been told for decades that coal burning is cooking the planet – and “boobie” was not the only one to tell them.
What is really upsetting is that Morrison, for example, has not told coal miners what will be done if coal is to become a stranded asset – for it is now in decline. Company boards around the world are divesting themselves from coal, according to Bob Carr on The Drum recently.
So what will Murdoch’s backflip achieve? Not much, if we look at Murdoch media writers, Sky After Dark or or the IPA, we will not see much support. For example, Sheridan, not the rowdiest commenter, says the Morrison government is using Abbott’s anti-tax policy to abandon reductions in carbon emissions. Yet Pets Credlin tells us the “tax” was not a tax at all, which spills the beans on Abbott and Morrison.
Morrison talks about 20% reduction on 2005 levels but does not mention the work of Gillard’s price on carbon. Nor is real credit given for renewables – so that we might believe the Coalition invented them.
Sheridan laments the fact that Bjorg Lomborg was not invited to establish in Oz a Copenhagen Consensus Center at first funded by the Danish government in 2006 but not after 2012. Lomborg claims climate change is overstated, that spending big money is not necessary, better to spend on diseases or water supply, and says humans will be so rich later in the century that they will be able to adapt to climate and survive.
Does this sound like what Morrison/Taylor are recommending.
Well no, but when we look at the “technology and no tax or regulations roadmap”, we see it is a very frail and inadequate “plan” based on very unscientific ideas.
For example, carbon capture and storage does not work economically; coal jobs are to exist for many decades; some “technologies” do not exist yet. Burning natural gas creates methane – a more powerful greenhouse gas – and water.
So my approach is that we quietly question the Coalition politicians and their supporters and challenge what they say constantly and publicly in order to unravel the secrecy which hides the misinformation embedded there.
We are being conned.
And how could I forget? New Zealand is sometimes criticised about carbon reductions.
Jacinda Ahern is asking the citizens what they want to be done about climate change.
Sounds like leadership and transparency to me.
you have got a beauty and missed one.
Boobie voted a bipartisan (bi-two not three no greens ergo pique) climate action down in 2009, it is now 2021 ergo 12 years wasted. That is what I will no longer present to this site.
But your lomberg reference is possible for those who become rich less the billions who won’t and are unlikely to survive??? Do you think scummo et al cares?
I’ve said it before and I’ll gladly repeat it..; If I was on the LNP side of criminality, I’d be slipping The Greens all the petrol / road-trip lunch money they needed from a “blind trust” fund to drive another “convoy” wedge right between Labor and its base next election…and as wam has so rightly pointed out, The Greens have used the EXACT same policy excuses used by the right-wing parties to excuse them siding with a more humanist ambition, ie; “ron”…later on…whilst at the same time allowing those middle-class, “soft-cock socialists” claiming left-leaning principles to park both their conscience and their franking-credit investments next to The Greens for warmth..all the time knowing that Green policy has a snowball’s chance in hell getting up!..after all, it has to be at least acknowledged by even the MOST WELDED on Green supporter that after c;20-25 years of Green political ambition to penetrate the Parliament, their current quota of members hardly screams “success story” in any measure!…those wrung-out dish-rags ; The Democrats, had more in The House! But hey….one day………….”ron”.
I tell you what’s the “give away” that says The Greens are a bullshit party..it’s the fact that they won’t make SHY (Sarah Hanson-Young) leader of the party…and that’s because of them all, SHE is most honest and loyal about her “Green” credentials…and as we all know about politics, the last person an “honest political party” needs as leader is the person who will alienate potential BIG donors by demanding those donors apply the same level of dedication to party conscience as their own.
Re your comments on the Greens… I agree.
IMO the Greens are unable to compromise, don’t get the bigger picture, have sold their ideals for a pocket full of mumbles.
They have become an Absolutist Party. In other words it’s all or nothing with the Greens. They stuffed up the CPRS!
Result. It’s nothing, they have achieved very little over the decades, and have yet to get over 10% of the vote.
Seems to me they’d rather make out how “cool” they are by squabbling with Labor, and “sucking” up to the Liberals… FFS!
“On Abbott’s first full day as Liberal leader, the Greens inexplicably delivered him an enormous strategic victory, voting with him to defeat Rudd’s Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme. This short-sighted tactical manoeuvre allowed Abbott to begin to build the momentum that has hamstrung long-term climate action for almost a decade. Had the CPRS passed the parliament in 2009, an emissions trading scheme would likely have been operating for some years before Abbott was able to become prime minister. And it’s likely that Abbott would not have been able to build a platform to tear down such a large reform after that time.”
Of course it would be naïve to view everything as Black & White in politics, skulduggery and a lack of trust now rule the day.
But one thing I do know is the RW L/NP only love the colour White, and try hard to Whitewash history to favour their bullshit.
I can see how we might be able to make positive suggestions about affirmative action, but there would be many, many suggestions, probably too many after so may years of neglect.
But, to be honest, I have not seen very many suggestions here on this thread. Many criticisms, but not many positive suggestions. And some contradictions as posters put their thoughts together.
So we have the idea of making a balanced coin of opposing ideas – which is the Murdoch idea of opposing climate change with climate denial, for ‘balance’ – or we could invent a new coin altogether. Or have stronger unions. Or get rid of religion. Or drive a convoy between Labor and its base, just to be nasty. [We have criticised Albanese plenty already.]
And let us blame the Greens for “allowing those middle-class, ‘soft-cock socialists’ [whoever they are] for parking their conscience and their franking credit investments next to The Greens for warmth…all the time knowing that Green policy has a snowball’s chance in hell getting up.”
[As for Green chances in Parliament, check how the Nationals have so many and the Greens so few. But, hey, more and more voters are wanting more action on climate change.]
So we come to the matter of Rudd’s failure with the CPR. That was a long time ago, eight years before the Guardian article of 2017. Rudd’s failure was in the past when Rudd lost his nerve and Gillard took up the challenge and put up a carbon levy which worked. And we saw the most foul and disgraceful crowd-stirring I have ever seen when Gillard was attacked with pure misogyny and lies by politicians, journalists and shock-jocks. And we know it was not a tax.
Gillard succeeded, and we see now the Coalition’s utter dog’s breakfast of a carbon “roadmap”. Abbott lasted just 2 years.
What needs to be done, along with so many other things, is to attack this faux policy item by item and word by word. It is already a complete failure and when the truth is revealed, as it will be, the Coalition will be hated with a vengeance.
“. . . And let us blame the Greens for “allowing those middle-class, ‘soft-cock socialists’ [whoever they are] for parking their conscience and their franking credit investments next to The Greens for warmth…”
And then this..: ” What needs to be done, along with so many other things, is to attack this faux policy item by item and word by word. It is already a complete failure and when the truth is revealed, as it will be, the Coalition will be hated with a vengeance.”
You can almost hear the snivelling, nose-wrinkling pettiness of the whinging little finishing-school prefect about it…
Well, guest…you’ve got a smidgin of Roman history knowledge about you, tell me..has this situation never been seen before…never been confronted before?…Didn’t that other great phoney, middle-class buffoon; Cicero, try to talk his way into influence in the Roman senate?…even declaring himself the best thing Romans had seen since flat-bread!?…So you tell me how long you reckon a society can go on blubbering about un-f-f-f-f-fair govt’ and do nothing except pay apologetic lip-service to a broken system? “Hated with a vengeance”, you declare…don’t say it too loud, because all those soft-cock swinging Green voters hung up on ANY of the MANY identity politics proposals put forward with intent to sabotage by The Greens, will return the LNP AGAIN with another majority!….It is only a matter of time before serious attention will be paid to a physical solution to these vandals and traitors who run every single part of our government and corp’ system into the ground….I just say thank God for the feral attitude of the tradies who can look for themselves!..
Joe, you are giving the Greens a real hammering. And my post has been elevated to the level of “the snivelling, nose-wrinkling pettiness of the whinging little finishing-school prefect”.
They say that for a man with a hammer in his hand, everything looks like a nail.
I have no idea what you are on about with talk of “a physical solution to these vandals and traitors”, with historical reference to Cicero, “identity politics proposals” of the Greens and the “feral attitude of the tradies”.
I just do not get it, Joe. Sorry.
But I do know that the Morrison/Taylor “roadmap” is a total farce and he is taking it to Glasgow as if he speaks for Australia.
Go well and stay safe.
Morrison is undeserving of a trip to beautiful Scotland, but at least he’ll be in a country whose ideals run counter to his very own.
Scotland has a great level of dislike for conservatives. It’s a country of Lefties (especially in Glasgow).
Lefties, lochs, and hairy coos.
So the circle turns and the policies Rudd would have had if The Greens had handed him their votes back then – weak policies with lots of pretend CCS to allow fossil fuels to have business as usual but with the bonus of coal and gas companies getting emissions reduction funding to boost profits. Sounds a lot like what Morrison is giving us. Woo hoo!
I know The Greens make good scapegoats for Labor and that stalwarts think Green votes are really Labor’s anyway – but Rudd and Labor killed climate action under Rudd, not The Greens. And had Greens voted with Labor it is an open question whether Abbott would have ousted Turnbull anyway and rode the surging wave of Right push back against emerging climate policies, only to repeal any Rudd led Labor/Greens climate policies, the way it went later with Gillard. The assumptions that in an Alt-history world Rudd’s scheme would have survived with Green votes and Australian climate politics would have miraculously gone sane forever after seem to lack any real basis. No more basis I suspect than repeating the Newcorp originated “analysis” that attributed the loss of Queensland seats to Bob Brown’s convoy.
Even Gillard’s lot couldn’t bring themselves to treat their own carbon pricing scheme as something to celebrate and defend like they believed in it – but preferred to keep alive the notion it was something forced on them by circumstances and The Greens. Distancing Labor from The Greens appeared more important than any solutions to the climate problem.
Not much has changed – The Greens should be wary of falling in with Labor’s shell games on climate.
Of course if Labor and Liberals ever decide solutions to the climate problem are more important than maintaining their differences and distances The Greens AND Nationals would be irrelevant. True back with Rudd, true with Gillard, true with Turnbull1 and Turnbull2. True with Morrison. But the mainstream Tri-opoly that owns Australian politics remains committed to Australia doing the least it can get away with – not ever the most we are capable of.
guest..: I wouldn’t have thought the dots were so far apart for such a deep thinker..
” They say that for a man with a hammer in his hand, everything looks like a nail.”
They say that for a person with a long fingernail, everything looks like a nose……but in the end “they” say an awful lot of nonsense.
go well and stay safe.
The above comment demonstrates the delusion of embedded “high-moral principles” in Federal politics owned by The Greens…pity Mr. Di Natale and his super-savvy advisers in the party didn’t apply such principles when making their many deals with the LNP…like this..:
” Greens leader Richard Di Natale has conceded his deal with the Government to cut pensions is unlikely to reap the party any of its sought-after changes to superannuation.” (https://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-06-17/greens-di-natale-concedes-super-changes-doubt-pension-deal/6552570) …
and of course the other aforementioned policies by Ken Fabian…but it is perhaps worth considering why the LNP chose the pension cut policy to negotiate with The Greens on…why not a transport one or NBN one..but NO..they chose the cut to pensions…why?..because I suspect they worked out …like The Greens strategists worked out that aged and otherwise pensioners did not figure that large in The Green base voting bloc..so they were quite willing to throw us pensioners to the LNP wolves and make a grab at the younger superannuation voters and steal a bit of Labor thunder…AND a few Labor voters.
The eternal lament of The Greens in not holding an decisive balance of power is the situation where they get c;10% of the vote and only one seat, whereas The Nat’s get 5% and a swag of seats!…this tells me of the scattered pattern of Green supporters and more reflects the concentration of those swinging voters looking for the identity politics – policies they can throw their vote away on yet feel the warm-fuzzies offered by a verbose/bragging Greens Party!
As for the notorious Bob Brown Convoy…OF COURSE it was directed to drive a wedge right between the Labor heartland vote at their base!…of bloody course it was…only a blathering fool as niaeve as a blindfolded nun at a “name the sausage” competition would deny……A anti-coal mining convoy driven right through the middle of a coal mining electorate in the last weeks before an election that blind Sister Mary Frederica could have seen….give me a break!..none of those voters in THAT electorate were ever going to give their tick to the green box..but hey!…down Lygon Street??….hey?..”Stop Adani!” …”We got your backs”…hey..worth a Melbourne seat…hey?
thank you for the history lesson. I am rather short on history because it is a very flexible and controversial thing – mainly composed of words words words – and I have a bad memory. As well, what is done is done and cannot be undone.
I am more concerned about what is happening in the politics of our own country, with a PM representing Oz overseas, spruiking a climate “plan” which is not a plan, influenced by a demagogue who loves cash in the paw, and interference in our politics by an ideologically driven multi-millionaire who was described in the UK as not fit to be a newspaper proprietor.
It is about the future and not so much of the past.
Fortunately, it is apparent that Morrison will be a pariah unless some “miracle” prevails. We must not allow that to happen – or it will all be too late for all of us. As for Bob Brown looking for votes in a coal-mining area, that was not his aim. He was reminding them of what was at stake – as he had been doing for many years.
And what has happened? Coal is in decline, Adani has not provide the jobs promised and is also in the business of renewables, renewables are cheaper than coal – and much talk now is about uranium.
Brown was looking far beyond short term trawling for votes the way Palmer was. As The Conversation pointed out in 2019 (in a wam post) the Greens have the best climate policy to match the science.