Looks like a decent number of people have read the article - but there aren't any comments. It's good to provoke some real debate - so if anyone has anything to say - or wants to comment - pls do. :))

In observing the interplay between ‘compassionate conservatism’ and ‘ruthless neo liberalism,’ especially relevant to the companion issues of ‘social justice’ and ‘employment equity’ the article refers to, two prime factors I observe of such consideration are first, are those issues of interplay realistic constructs, and second, if they are, what are the prime determinants of their prospective pursuit?

Of the first consideration, I hold no confidence in their reality, that demonstrated market volatility, regressive events observed such as the GFC, climate change requirement, and the comprehensive record of conservative liberal ideology, consistently demonstrating it dislocated from, and without any substance, of proof or reason, for me demonstrates its consideration entirely pointless.

Aspects of Labour political ideology may be observed similarly aberrant, however in context, it is able to demonstrate some attributes qualifying and quantifying its central tenets.

Considerations of social justice and employment equity are increasingly observed submissive of economic considerations, and to fathom their potential according to current parameter indicators, we are required to observe macro economic consideration and position.

That observation according to most reliable projections, indicates a decline in western economic growth until the pertaining GDP ratios of both the west and eastern ‘tigers’ are observed in balance. That such indicator is synonymous of comparative per capita standard of living rates between the two demographics, observes a potential for such western decline to continue for an indeterminate and perhaps extended period. Unless of course there is observed a paradigm cultural change.

Continued

For how may you implement such reforms proficiently if your economy is in gradual and progressive decline? Yes, progressive consideration of such issues as social justice and worker equity, may in fact be part of the solution of such anomaly, but only if they are part of the big [macro economic] picture. And that picture retains considerable challenge.

For it is currently observed in the west, its retention of severe competitive disadvantage of wage comparison with the eastern tigers, especially in manufacturing. In an open market such observation obviously impacts upon consideration of Return On Investment.

For the west to culturally get its head around its entrenched market concepts, that will require new paradigm and dynamics for reform, I suggest will encounter considerable resistance.

For example, its concepts of worker equity, toward comprehensive ability to compete within eastern and wider global markets, where the profit scales of ROI will correspondingly require consideration of dynamic change
[including decrease in opportunity for profiteering], I suggest will require a new paradigm. For a principle of scientific management is balanced distribution of wealth.

The question may inevitably be, whether that resistance of the west to such required dynamic cultural change, will realise such reform meeting intransigence or progressive consideration, that may be reflective of the current comparative example of requirement for addressing the issue of climate change.

It may be observed further, of no coincidence, consideration of energy requirements is a prime factor of both these current issues.

For the key determinant for both issues will be the ability to meet and engage the timelines required.

Dear Tristan, I post because I felt sorry for you. When a writer gets only the sort of response you did from Ngarmada, you’ve pretty well had it.

I found your article too laced with socialist diatribe. The only thing it tells me is just how much of a threat an opposition is to you. Now why, in a democracy, should that be?

Bad luck Tristan, that the only other post you have received so far is spindoc who may be only able to string two sentences together with a worn out cliche.

Tristan
Could a 'compassionate Conservative' really be a boon for workers given that Abbott's focus is on delivering incentives for wealth creators?

Abbott is not the only pragmatist in a middle class corporatised society. The middle class is not as easy to reach ideologically as the elites with obvious economic vested interests; nor those at the disadvantaged end of the spectrum who depend on social justice and a fair and equitable industrial relations system.

Both the left and right play to middle class materialism and pander to the business lobbies - gone are the days when the Libs stood for the interests of small business and fair competition.

The failure of Work Choices should be a sign Australians still possess an egalitarian streak and that you can only push an electorate so far. While acknowledging the importance of business Australians won't accept huge imbalances in power between workers and employers (or labour and capital).

What would be new if government started to listen to the electorate on issues like privatisation, housing affordability, disability assistance, importance of carers, social housing, corporatisation of education, pursuit of wealth at the expense of quality and merit-values based systems, improved democratic processes, accountability and improved healthcare we might be getting somewhere.

I don't think Tony Abbott is offerring anything new just more of the same. Then so is the ALP. We stand where we have for sometime with the tweedledee and tweedledum face of Australian politics.