The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > The passing of Gough Whitlam > Comments

The passing of Gough Whitlam : Comments

By Don Aitkin, published 22/10/2014

He did not enjoy criticism from someone like me, 21 years his junior, who wrote a weekly column in the National Times. And he loved to score off others, sometimes when it really was not to his advantage to do so. I got my share of it.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. All
Agronomist,

I guess the point I was trying unsuccessfully to make was that people now forget that most of these initiatives already had a history. Yes, Gough was able to bring them to legislative fruition, so he gets the guernsey. But without what had happened before he would have been unable to do most of them — he simply didn't have the time.
Posted by Don Aitkin, Wednesday, 22 October 2014 3:57:02 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
A nauseating orgy of fawning statolatry over the death of Whitlam.

Can't count the number of grown and even educated adults who have said the government provided "free" this or that. These people are operating at the mental level of an infant.

As for his so-called social reforms, all you have to do is ask whether it's justified to get these results by threatening to cage and rape people.

Well? Is it?

Whitlam was just another bumbling tyrant with a dream of unlimited power, and good riddance.

We should rejoice in the death of tyrants not lament them.
Posted by Jardine K. Jardine, Wednesday, 22 October 2014 3:59:37 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Don, I agree with you that the previous history made it practical to introduce some of the agenda. Not necessarily all of it, such as abolishing conscription.

Whitlam capitalised on that. McMahon had not and would not have. Fraser and Howard arguably would not have either.
Posted by Agronomist, Wednesday, 22 October 2014 4:03:34 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Yes, there were things that only a new government could do, and ending conscription and our role in Vietnam were two good examples. One of the senior ministers in the McMahon government whom I met a few days after the 1972 elections was most up-beat about the result, despite the loss. He explained that there were so many things that the long-standing coalition government couldn't do that needed to be done — because they'd said No and couldn't now say Yes. Whitlam and Barnard have cleared the decks, he said...
Posted by Don Aitkin, Wednesday, 22 October 2014 4:15:10 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy