Septic Tanks are going to Septic Tank
Andy. I am a political realist. For the forseeable future Australia will be governed by either the COALition or Labor. There is no other realistic option. Minor parties may have influence in the Senate and it is worth voting for them there. In the House of Representatives there is an outside chance of independents or minor parties holding the balance of power, but they have no chance of being elected in the vast majority of seats. To pretend, as some do, that there is no significant difference between the parties is not only to deny the simple facts but also to deny our entire political history since world war2. Any history of that time reveals a stark difference between the direction of the parties and their primary concerns.
In brief, the COALition's concerns have always focused on the economy and particularly on the interests of large corporations. They are economic rationalists who believe, despite decades of evidence to the contrary, that a strong economy is all the country needs. Labor, on the other hand, recognises that a strong economy that does not distribute its benefits equitably is just as bad as a weak economy. The same people suffer in both cases. If you live off you investments or are employed by a large corporation then no doubt it is in your self-interest to vote for the COALition. The rest of us benefit for a Labor government. This pattern has not changed over the entire post-war period and I do not see it changing anytime soon.
+1 Andy @10.10.
minor votes are distributed anyway, so it is absolute fallacy to say you have two choices or waste your vote
an einstein quote springs to mind... something about continually doing the same thing and expecting a different result is the definition of insanity
labor's problem is, as my friend says... dont piss on me and tell me its raining
they've been doing that for a bloody long time
the internet has revealed all the lies of both parties, and some of the bullshit that gets around that we are supposed to accept as fact is just insulting
the left of politics seem to be still having difficulties adjusting to this new reality
they're are losing the cyber space majorly
slick professional nauseating internet campaigns like biden's are just so fucking false its embarrassing, but it appears the participants just cannot see it
Nice one Vic.
Blowfly, nothing's going to change if we say there's no alternative, it's totally self-fulfilling.
As for political history, it's totally disingenuous to bring up the last 70 odd years of Australian politics as justification of the difference between Lib and Labor.
It wasn't that long ago that the Libs were almost certainly to the left of current-day Labor.
"In brief, the COALition's concerns have always focused on the economy and particularly on the interests of large corporations."
In the past 45 years, no question. Before that, highly arguable.
"They are economic rationalists who believe, despite decades of evidence to the contrary, that a strong economy is all the country needs."
The thing is, your above description of the LNP applies equally to Labor.
Actually I'm being slightly intellectually dishonest to make a point.
I'll take Labor anyday over the Libs - especially after the last election it finally seemed that after the last few decades Labor may have turned a corner, but of course to no avail at the ballot box.
The fact remains that Labor are demonstrably right-wing and we need to continue to look for alternatives for an economically, socially and environmentally sustainable future.
*steps off soapbox*
"If you hate the ALP and don't support the COALition, under the current political conditions your only option would be to vote informal unless you live in one of the very few seats held by an independent or a minor party."
This statement of yours really bothers me Blowfly, its an insult to democracy and shows not only a defeatist attitude but also a real lack of understanding.
This is demonstrably incorrect.:
“In brief, the COALition's concerns have always focused on the economy and particularly on the interests of large corporations. They are economic rationalists who believe, despite decades of evidence to the contrary, that a strong economy is all the country needs.”
There is no evidence to show that the LNP gives a rat’s arse about any economy beyond that which multinationals and their domestic business mates can skim off our populace.
If the LNP cared about a strong economy they would introduce the domestic gas reservation policy they agreed to , instead of holding their boot on the throat of the Australian economy by making us pay world’s highest prices for our own energy resources. They would remove the tax concessions and the foreign access to our real estate market which together place another boot on the neck of Australia’s economy through elevated real estate prices .
The LNP cares not for the economy.
It was Paul Keating, as both Treasurer and PM who moved Labor to the right. He observed that the social democratic parties across Europe had been smashed during the 80s and recognised that the same fate awaited Labor in Australia unless they took a realistic approach to the management of the economy. He then dereguated the financial industry and floated the dollar. At the same time though, Labor established the Accord, which guaranteed decent wages and ended decades of industrial disputes, and created Medicare. The contrast with the Fightback program proposed by Hewson in his losing campaign was stark. It was pure neoliberal economic rationalism.
The big difference between then and now is in the nature of the public debate which was once controlled by the major media outlets. At that time even the less reputable media drew the line at outright lies and misinformation. They may have had their biases and what they did not say was often as important as what they did say. The reality though is that, as we saw in Australia as well as the US and Britain, it is now possible to run an election campaign on total disprovable bullshit through social media.
The result of this is the kind of attitudes that are seen here; the wishy washy intellectually lazy equating of two parties who are profoundly different. The perfect is the enemy of the good, it seems. If Labor cannot be a perfect social democratic party delivering overnight all things to all people then they are just as bad as the current government: a profoundly corrupt cartel, with nothing but self-interest to balance their commitment to totally discredited political and economic theories.
Fair call Dude.
Blowfly it's intellectually lazy not to acknowledge the endless similarities in economic policy and of course cosy relationships with business - the two parties are not "profoundly" different, they are both neoliberal, it's very clear.
I'm not after perfect, I just don't want neoliberal.
So given we are going to get either a Lib or Lab federal government in the short-medium term future. Here's my dream team parliament:
Minority Labor Government because the LNP is incompetent, disingenuous, and thoroughly corrupt. They are not for turning while in power.
The cross bench would need to hold the ALP to account. I'd love to see the balance of power in the hands of a combination of the following. Greens (because the ALP tend to be environmental champions in opposition and then LNP lite when in power). Andrew Wilkie and Rex Patrick types, because Canberra needs corruption fighters inside the tent. Specialist technocrats and highly academic people like Anne Aly because the last thing parliament needs is more retail politicians with fuck all depth. Chuck in a couple of working class battlers (eg Lambie without the dog whistle) and we are done.
My dream parliament would have no One Nation people, No Bob Katters, No Clive Palmer puppets, No nutters like Craig Kelly, and No fuckwits who rort their travel and office expenses. These fuckers are nothing more than grifters who offer absolutely nothing constructive.
There we go folks, I'd love to hear your dream teams. Especially you blowin, because I'm actually genuinely intrigued.
Worth a read.
If it has to be Labor, that sounds like a reasonable and theoretically achievable compromise Vic.
Would be very nice if the Greens unburied the topic of population growth vis a vis the environment and brought it back to the table, a a shitload of people are more than ready.
"because the ALP tend to be environmental champions in opposition and then LNP lite when in power"
Yep this is true with so many other aspects of Labor policy as well, hence my continued discussions with the Blowfly.
well Andy M, that dream team has to be better than the current nightmare scenario where the corrupt incompetents rely on the lunatics to get legislation passed.
"I'm not after perfect, I just don't want neoliberal. "
Mate when you vote (with the few exceptions I outlined before). you have a choice about where your vote will end up. EITHER with the COALition and their total commitment to neoliberalism OR the ALP with their pragmnatic acceptance of neoliberal policies accompanied by effective social welfare. That's it. Tick box A or tick box B. Argue the issues as much as you like, disdain all political activity as beneath your high ideals, but try as you may, you can only avoid that choice by voting informal.
How will alternatives ever get elected with logic like that?
You're a mouthpiece for the two majors.
The Greens have a Lower House seat, how can we continue this change if we remain with a "Lib or Labor" mentality?
The weird thing is, all these people who bang on about diversity and representation and democracy don't seem to get it.
“ Perfect is the enemy of the good “ doesn’t apply in this instance.
The ALP aren’t even good. I understand your reluctance to confront the reality of mass immigration and neoliberalism being applied to our nation but that doesn’t alter the outcome which is exactly that we are witnessing.
Surplus labour leads to declining living standards irrespective of the wallpaper thin legislative protection the ALP proposes to introduce . Same goes for the environment. No amount of wishful thinking or good intentions will alter the fact that more people equals worse outcomes for our country.
So if the ALP oversees greater inequality, worsening standards of living and a degrading environment, I can’t see any good in that . What else matters ?
I too find your defeatist attitude appalling. It doesn’t take much for a new movement to develop momentum under a determined social cause. Australia has the talent and the capacity to field a political party which has a proper vision for Australia beyond the neoliberal Ponzi. It’s certainly not like the current major parties have a monopoly on high achieving people.
All it really needs is one decent person with a vision for the population to rally around. They don’t have to be an Obama-esque master orator , Australians don’t really value the Uber statesman as much as they do a reasonable person with obvious authenticity and integrity. Look at Dick Smith for example. Not exactly possessing high charisma but a person whom Australians can trust and relate to . It doesn’t matter who it is . An naturally appropriate indigenous person would be perfect as they’d be able to unite the nation without the histrionics of making an issue of race .
My defeatist attitude? Holy emoleum Batman! I am presenting a case that one side is better than the other and that hope lies in that direction while you are throwing your hands in the air saying "They're all the same, we should just go and eat dirt!" If you really believe that, why even bother commenting or taking an interest in politics?
If "good" is too strong a word for you, isn't "less bad" worth voting for above "plain bad"?
"The Greens have a Lower House seat, how can we continue this change if we remain with a "Lib or Labor" mentality?"
Vote whatever you like just always place the ALP above the COAlition in your preferences, that's all. That way, in the distribution of those preferences, your vote will go to the ALP.
Your "defeatist" attitude seems to be that there is no other alternative.
Billionaires who are prepared to lose millions to control the media narrative, ineffective Labor leaders who waffle and can't cut through despite a mountain of material. Keating would have destroyed these LNP numpties.
ALP can't win under Albanese.
Anyone know why Rex Patrick ditched Centre Alliance. Seems like a straight shooter .
"Your "defeatist" attitude seems to be that there is no other alternative."
I have been anxiously awaiting all morning an explanation of how things might be improved other than by making sure your vote goes to Labor. If you have a plan for someone other than the COALition or the ALP to be able to form government anytime in the near future I would love to hear it.
Fair call from a realist's point of view but don't play a part in continuing to entrench the two party neoliberal duopoly.
What do they say?
Subvert the dominant paradigm?
A little heads up for those who decided they’d argue that the Democrats didn’t endorse , promote and encourage the riots from day one right up until the polls showed they were political poison .
Whaddayareckon , BB ?
Vice Presidential candidate soliciting bail out money for violent rioters and anarchists with the stated aim of tearing down US society ....good look ?
" Vice Presidential candidate soliciting bail out money for violent rioters and anarchists with the stated aim of tearing down US society ....good look ?"
The bulk of the arrests were for minor non-violent offences. If you have any evidence that any money from the fund was used to bail violent offenders, you should post it. The purpose of the fund is to make sure that bail is not only available to the wealthy. If the courts were willing to set bail then why shouldn't it be accessed? Was it smart politics to put the appeal up on her twitter account? (did you bother to check if it is actually there?). Probably not, but it was a means of supporting people in a time of crisis. I imagine the police were grateful to get the majority of people bailed and out of the system as quickly as possible. What's the point of leaving someone charged with blocking a roadway in remand for weeks and weeks?
At Minnesota Freedom Fund, we believe that wealth should never determine who is kept in jail. That’s what the money bail system does. It puts a price on freedom that only a few can afford and many cannot. This system is unjust.
That’s why we’re working to create a society that values the freedom of all people, regardless of class or identity, ends mass incarceration, and invests in restorative and transformative justice.
As of June 22, 2020, police have made 14,000 arrests in 49 cities since the protests began, with most arrests being locals charged with low-level offenses such as violating curfews or blocking roadways.
There have been numerous reports and videos of aggressive police actions using physical force including "batons, tear gas, pepper spray and rubber bullets on protesters, bystanders and journalists, often without warning or seemingly unprovoked." These incidents have provoked "growing concern that aggressive law enforcement tactics intended to impose order were instead inflaming tensions.”
Some initial acts of property destruction on May 27 by a 32-year-old man with ties to white supremacist organizations, who local police investigators said was deliberately inciting racial tension, led to a chain reaction of fires and looting
Wow, blowin is now a part time anti-violence advocate. What a difference 72 hours makes. A few days ago he was excusing a Trump fan of murdering two people.
And of course he's only a part time anti-violence campaigner, because he's conveniently ignoring Trump's praise of his fan club as they drove into Portland shooting and macing people. Way to go blow blow. Peace out brother.
I see Blowin's still well and truly enjoying his alternative facts and alternative reality.
1/ Kamala Harris had no idea or care about which crimes she was soliciting bail outs for.
2/ Kamala Harris didn’t solicit bail money to fight inequality in bail opportunities for the impoverished, this was a specific and direct solicitation for those arrested at the riots.
3/ I don’t care about whether the bail outs were legal , just that it’s evidence the Democrats supported rioters as you claimed they did not.
4/ Got nothing to do with the aggression of police and everything to do with the politicisation of the movement which has since backfired . The Democrats are now backpedaling and you are denying they ever supported the rioters.
Fake news is on your end. You wanted evidence, here it is.
You're like a foxnews fever dream blowin. I know you're really threatened by this BLM movement, as you take any acknowledgement of racial inequality as a personal attack upon yourself, but far out. Complete alternate reality to help you excuse your hatred.
Ha Ha JQ, Whenever someone dares to mention racial inequality, Old mate blowin sticks two fingers in his ears, closing his eyes, and gets all Gene Wilder and Richard Pryor on us.
Dude's great value is that he gives us an insight into the minds of Trump voters. He will probably chill out now he's got that off his chest.
You claimed the Democrats didn’t endorse the riots .i just showed you they did . Plenty of other examples. Just own it. Bit dishonest dancing around this by discussing irrelevant shit .
No, you showed what you consider evidence Blowin. You seem to accept just about anything if it lines up even slightly with your version of the truth. Conversely, if you don't like it, you'll dismiss it regardless of its veracity. Bit rich you talking about dishonesty don't ya think?
"You claimed the Democrats didn’t endorse the riots .i just showed you they did ."
Sorry but saying it three times doesn't make it true.
I think a lot of this is about definitions blowfly. You see in Blowin's world, there are no protests, there are only riots. Everyone there, regardless of their behaviour, is guilty by association.
Therefore, in Blowins world, if you support the root cause of BLM, you are supporting riots and violence.
Black and white. Simple solutions for complex problems.
It's what he does in his head to morally justify his unrestrained hatred. It's scary stuff.
"It's what (blowin) does in his head to morally justify his unrestrained hatred. It's scary stuff."
Kinda like the 17 kid who travelled hundreds of kilometres to "protect private businesses" and then murdered two people and shot another one in the arm with an assault rifle. You know the one blowin: the kid you excused because he was killing BLM people.
Alternatively JQ , you could be honest enough to admit that people don’t need bailing out of prison for peacefully protesting . These people are guilty of crimes AKA rioters , looters , arsons and assault etc.
BB...ask yourself this : Youve just been shown irrefutable proof of Kamala Harris cold canvassing for money to bail out rioters , yet you think a USA today fact-check somehow overrides this direct evidence ? Time to admit that you are no longer seeking the truth , just reinforcement for your personal faith in a political party even when it’s been shown to be lacking.
Not in the mood for integrity tonight ?
If you wanted to disseminate the idea that you were against violent rape would you go about it by ringing up everyone you knew and asking them to donate money to get bail for a rapist none of you had ever met ? Well that’s what Kamala “ I don’t support rioters “ Harris did for rioters.
Not for the first time I find myself more offended by the latest VL rants than anything Blowin or DSDS or most others ever say here. Try to give it a rest occasionally McShouty not forgetting, well maybe you have, forums don’t lend themselves to overly nuanced debate ...
Blowin, you make the assumption that someone charged with an offence is guilty of it. Then you further assume that offence is rioting. Your prejudice clouds any rational judgement, you can't be objective on anything. It gets boring..
I'm sure months ago when BLM protest were mainstream most protestors were doing it for the right reasons, but anyone who think's the current protest/riots in Portland or even other areas are still the same protestors and doing it for the same reasons like racial inequality have rocks in their head's
Protestors/rioters in places like Portland now are just Antifa or Antifa supporters using BLM as a cover and have been clashing with far right groups since at least May 2019 (expect much longer)
Everything happening now in Portland was already happening over a year ago just at a lesser level and everything happening now was predicted(including deaths) in this Joe Rogan interview with Andy Ngo (who was beaten up by Antifa) from July 2019 ( i just finished it)
BTW. They were even talking about why the mayor and police of weren't dealing with the issue back then.
Blowin, people have been mostly arrested for being out past curfew. They are not guilty of the things you think they are - sure a few are, but most are not.
Here's honesty for you blowin: Yes, there are people rioting out there, causing chaos and violence. They will be among those arrested. There are many more people out there protesting a very just cause peacefully.
That post is not even close to irrefutable proof - that you think so only demonstrates the paucity of your morals. There is a big difference between protestors and rioters. Rioters are in the minority. The post is canvassing for donations to a charity to help get protestors out on bail, not rioters. The charity is not set up to free rioters.
When you said:
'2/ Kamala Harris didn’t solicit bail money to fight inequality in bail opportunities for the impoverished, this was a specific and direct solicitation for those arrested at the riots.'
This is false, if you have any sense of dignity you'd realise this. The post was soliciting for donations to a charity. The charities explicit purpose is exactly what you said it wasn't. This is easily demonstrably false, yet this is your truth, because you want it to be. Stop being a coward and be honest for once, how scared are you really about admitting that you are wrong?
I never excused that kid of anything. I just can’t believe that you are suprised when over three months of violence and destruction wrought upon innocent communities is finally met with some form of vigilante action .
How many months of innocent people beaten , threatened , had their businesses burnt down , watched their communities cowering in fear of masked domestic terrorists , even murder , before you would expect armed Americans to start taking matters into their own hands and policing their communities because regional politicians disable the local police and refuse federal help in order to politick ?
This has been playing in my head all afternoon and Steve Pezman’s words about Timothy Leary’s view on surfers and the dance in an early Kidman movie ...
Didn't we alreadu go through this?
"These people are guilty of crimes AKA rioters , looters , arsons and assault etc."
No the vast majority were arrested on either breach of curfew or blocking a roadway.
"Youve just been shown irrefutable proof of Kamala Harris cold canvassing for money to bail out rioters"
....and? People charged with an offence and given the option of bail are entitled to it. You may prefer that only the rich white folk can actually afford it but there are organisations, such as the one supported by Kamala Harris, that try to even up the score. You might wish you were judge, jury and hangman but the US still has the rudiments of a justice system and people are presumed innocent until found guilty.
yet you think a USA today fact-check somehow overrides this direct evidence
The fact check demonstrates that your basic point is a straight forward lie. The Democrats have donre nothing to encourage viuolence and everything possible to reduce it. Trump on the other hand constantly increases the riskof violence by raising expectations that it will happen.
Mate, honestly, putting aside any hostility that might have been between us, I think this debate is not doing you any good at all. There is an angry tone behind your contributions that suggests you might be better to have a beer, watch the sunset and think of all the wonderful waves you have ridden....and all those yet to come.
So Indo is a facist and Blowin an armed vigilante. OK. Got it.
I’m not angry at all. I am watching the sunset. My tone is one of exasperation.