This is ridiculous. Julia G. was not elected by some "faceless mafiso" but by the parliamentary labor caucus, the whole 112 members of it. The Australian constitution has no provision for direct election of a Prime Minister. He/she is elected from the elected Labor members of Parliament to be their leader and, ipso facto, the Prime Minister. These people elect and these same people "unelect" their leader/Prime Minister.

We did not vote for the faceless party. We have voted for the party with patricular leaders were Gillard was proposed just Deputy PM. We have vote for the party which had offered that Kevin Rudd to be Prime Minister. That is why Labor has won. Rudd was precondition to winning. But Gillard so much wanted the job, that conned to pretend loyal so to come to trust, organised bullying and then discarded nation's choice.
Who would vote for Labor if Gillard is running for the government where it is proven that she could not care less about the people of Australia?

What a refreshing take on recent events, imbued with a thorough understanding of the workings of Australia's system of government and a realsitic understanding of modern political power machinations. Oh wait - it was the exact opposite ... cliched, boring and naive.

Of course, we're all entitled to hold an opinion about things, so I expect people will vent their spleen at the polls if they really care. What happened last week was tawdry and cruel but also an acknowledged part of the "game". Democracy was not damaged one iota. The reputation of some MPs and some ALP hacks perhaps, brand damage for the ALP for sure but democracy came through with flying colours.

Careful tory boy your misogyny and fear of women is showing.

It's all happened so quickly that many of us
are still quite stunned. However, probably by the
time the election rolls around, people will
be more concerned with who can meet their needs,
and how well they can do the job, than how they
got into power.

Politics is not an even playing field - it's a
world in which only the tough seem to survive.
Now it's up to Julia Gillard to prove to Australia
that she can give the country much more than the
man she's deposed.

Kevin Rudd is being blamed for so many things.
However, it was Julia Gillard and Wayne Swan who
wanted the Emissions Trading Scheme to be place "on hold,"
and Kevin Rudd finally complied with their wishes.
He was also persuded to change his tactic on asylum seekers,
and he even met with the directors of the mining companies
and indicated that he was open to "negotiation." And let's
not forget that the most recent polls also
showed that Kevin Rudd was still the preferred Prime
Minister, yet the Labor Party factions backed by
Gillard and Swan, tell us that Kevin Rudd had "lost his
way." Despite the fact that they are following precisely
in Rudd's footsteps - and doing that which he had started
to do but was not allowed to finish. If Ms Gillard is all
about negotiation and team work, why did so few decide
for the many - the course of action that was taken?
Many Labor MPs did not have a clue as to what was really
happening and why?

I guess we'll have to wait and see in what direction
the new leadership will take us, and how really different will
it be from what the previous PM was doing.

Ms Gillard told us it was, "A good day for red-heads."
The question that needs to be answered though is,
"Was it a good day for Australia?"

We'll have to wait and see.

cont'd ...

I forgot to add that Julia Gillard and Wayne
Swann and Co. claim that Kevin Rudd had "lost
his way." In actual fact in the eyes of the
Electorate he hadn't lost his way, as according
to the most recent polls Rudd was still the preferred
Prime Minister.

However, in the eyes of the Labor Party factions who
were discontent with a centrist Prime Minister who
worked in the interests of the Electorate and not the
Party Faction faithful, he in their minds had "lost
his way." The Electorate throughout the history of
the Labor Party has never approved of the factional
in-fighting that dragged down other PM's and Party
Leaders.

It appears that now that the factions are back in control,
they think that they will "find their way," whether the
Electorate approves or not time will tell.

Analyzing recent events, leading up towards the upcoming
elections it appeared that Kevin Rudd was seriously
working towards winning the election, unfortunately,
the factions did not give him the time and opportunity
to complete his task.

If it was an election to elect a President in the American
system, Kevin Rudd would win the election. It is the
party structure in this country that impedes the system.
Perhaps that needs to be changed, as has been suggested
by so many in previous public debates.

Matthew,

It is delightful to have students contributing to OLO and especially young men, whose articles are seldom seen and that shouldn't be so. Rest assured that your comments are valued and your efforts will encourage others to speak up as well. After all, that is what freedom is all about and never let anyone take that away from you.

As you will see from my responses to other articles on this subject. I happen to disagree with you on a number of matters. For instance, the Labor caucus provides a democratic way of electing leaders, I believe.

I would like to see a bit more attention to facts and balance in your writing, so take this as a learning experience and come back with another article soon. No need to stick to politics when there is a broad spectrum of other issues that are crying out for fresh, young opinion.

*and he even met with the directors of the mining companies
and indicated that he was open to "negotiation."*

Thats what the mug punters were told. As the miners
tell it, they all got a lecture. There was to be
no negotiation about the fundamentals, simply about
the introductary time table.

Arrogance at it's worst! I don't blame the
miners for standing up for their rights.

Yabby, "There was to be no negotiation about the fundamentals, simply about the introductary time table."

Yes it was arrogance, but it has become commonplace for the government and senior managers both public and private to act that way. Ram through what they want, bayonet any 'objectors' and mop up later with spin.

Ever seen the public environmental agencies in action? Straight out of The Prince by Niccolò Machiavelli - consultation after and restricted to which way out of one you can 'choose' to be gutted.

The author needs to get over it -

And tonight Tiggy Forrest tells us Rudd was on the brink of opening new negotiations with the mining companies this week and it looked as if this time they were going to achieve something.

What a laugh if Julia stuffs it up.

Dear Cornflower,

You said that you believe that "the Labor caucus
provides a democratic way of electing leaders?"

There was nothing democratic about eight faceless
factional manipulators approaching Julia Gillard
to talk to then Prime Minister Kevin Rudd behind
closed doors. I presume the "democratic" action
came in the Party Room the next day when the gauntlet
was thrown down by Gillard to challenge Rudd for the
leadership. He did not pick up the gauntlet.

What would have been democratic is if they would have
talked it out beforehand in the Party Room with everybody
present. Isn't this precisely what the factions had been
complaining about, that Kevin Rudd did not communicate
with the Party Room, yet they turn around and do exactly
the same thing themselves.

Doesn't look very democratic to me.

Dear Yabby,

You obviously haven't watched the news lately, where
a top mining company director expressed surprise
at Kevin Rudd's demise. The director claimed
that their negotiations on the mining tax were reaching
amicable conclusions. And, this director was one of the
most obstinate critics of the mining tax.

Before the axing of the Prime Minister, there was no rioting in the streets, or nation wide-strikes, or plummeting share market prices, or a decline in the value of the Australian dollar, or a falling credit rating.

There was no need to axe the Prime Minister at all, and I wonder what ministers and Prime Ministers in other countries are now thinking about Australia.

A country run by an amateur actor theatre corp?

Intelligent voters acquaint themselves with the various parties' overall policy platforms and vote accordingly, or vote for an independent candidate if s/he espouses views which they prefer to party platforms. Unfortunately, far too many voters behave like 'sheeple' and respond to the quasi-presidential personality politics that the media have created in recent years.

Those idiots who think they voted for Kevin Rudd actually didn't - they voted for an ALP candidate who, if elected, was part of the caucus that democratically replaced its parliamentary leader.

It's called the Westminster System. Ignorance is no excuse for bleating.

*You obviously haven't watched the news lately, where
a top mining company director expressed surprise
at Kevin Rudd's demise. The director claimed
that their negotiations on the mining tax were reaching
amicable conclusions*

Dear Foxy, I am far better informed about all this, then
you may imagine. I am fully aware of Twiggy Forrest's
latest claim. I also also aware of Twiggy Forrest complaining
that Rudd refused to return his calls and Twiggy demonstrating
on the streets of Perth.

This whole thing played out over time, Kevie clearly woke
up far too late for his own good.

Besides, the really big players in this are not Twiggy,
but BHP, Rio and Xstrata, so what their CEOs think has
vital bearing on all this. Just a few days ago, the
Chairman of BHP was still sending out notices to us
shareholders, that the Govt simply refused to negotiate.

So if anyone is out of touch, it is seemingly not me,
but you.

Foxy,

I tend to the same position that you have on this. Though I didn't vote for Kevin Rudd, I just can't sort of stomach this whole rotten deal.

I'm getting a little bit angry too, because I really wanted to see a female pollie as PM. I have itched for the big event - someone elected in her own right, and Julia prolly would have been my pick (certainly not that other cranky one in the Liberal mob) and so I am disappointed too.

As I recall, people voted for Kevin07 not Labor musical chairs.

What the hell is the point of drumming up public attachment to any individual if their retinue can unseat them at will.

Also, if he is the party leader and they are supposed to be working as a team - why didn't his assisting ministers use their negotiation skills and their excellent understanding of law and of union matters, in the interests of their party as a whole. Shouldn't one expect a team member to contribute their best regardless of whether they are leader or not.

I saw Kev07 sitting in the back row and it was - awful. I really became quite fond of the man at that point. How hard it must have been to turn up and bear that. That takes guts - and add to that the additional indignity of not even being given a portfolio.

He continues to demonstrate a loyalty to the party as a whole that his backstabbers haven't.

I still say I would have liked to see Kim Beasley have a go as PM too. I think he'd have made a very good one.

Beware the ides of March, a Magpie squawked as it swooped over the head of the PM on his way home to the Lodge, unbeknownst to him, his final weary after work journey home as PM, that’s odd thought the PM; she must have a nest nearby and thought me a threat. The following fated morning the PM gathered his Caucus for a strategy meeting and on his arrival at the forum a group gathered around him.

Their leader, his deputy a trusted red Medusa headed woman known as Julia “Vinegar Tits” Gillard approached the PM. The multi headed red serpents on her head hissing and flailing wildly in all directions as she floated across a floor covered by an icy mist in a scene reminiscent of a classic Boris Karloff horror movie. Then when she was sure, she thrust her steel blade deeply into the PM’s back, her head serpent’s eyes ablaze hissing loudly in unison as the blade cut through flesh and bone. She retreated leaving her blade firmly embedded her white silken toga splattered with the PM’s blood. The PM mortally wounded was just barely standing when his General Wayne “Toe Cutters” Swan thrust the second dagger into the PM then one after another all the treacherous followed.
The PM grasping a marble pillar to remain upright surveyed his assassins and gasped his last words “Et tu, Brute”, “Et tu”. Then in victory Vinegar Tits standing atop Parliament House let out a nationwide hysterical howl, a deep demonic cackle in harmony with the gathering black clouds, thunder and lightning.
A darkness had begun to slowly creep across the Land of Oz and the people were heard to say in hashed tones, “who shall save us now”. The Captains of industry later claimed “what problems” we were negotiating just fine

Dear Yabby,

If you've got some sort of inside track on all this,
well then I'd have to bow to your superior knowledge.
However all I've got to go on is my perception,
and the media. Watching TV programmes, reading
newspapers, et cetera, as well of course, the obvious,
that Kevin Rudd wasn't given enough time to achieve
what he'd set out to do, but was cut short.

Dear CJ,

Ah yes, the "Westminster System."
The illusion that the Australian government works
or should work, on the same principles as the
British government. The similarities between the two
systems are largely those of decor, like the use of
the mace. The major difference between the two systems
is that Australia is a federation, a concept totally
incomprehensible to the British. An appeal to the
Westminster system is a slogan used by Opposition
parties in an attempt to trick their opponents into
foolish resignations.

Dear Pynch,

I'm so glad that you also can see that what happened
was somewhat premature and unfair. All we can do now
is wait and see what happens next. Frankly I don't
see what Julia Gillard can hope to prove in such
a short time, if the election is to be in August.

"What should be the most serious of professions had morphed into a scene out of Mean Girls with the biggest upstart in a clique of 15-year-old girls clawing their way to become the new Queen Bee."

One, incredibly intelligent, well-educated female, not a group of girls.

And she was elected (unopposed!) by the caucus because Rudd refused to run! in case we forgot that little detail.

I loved Kevin Rudd and would have voted for him again, but your article, Matthew Lilley, speaks more of your hatred of women and mis-education about politics than the truth!

Westralis - wOw!

I don't know why it was cathartic to read that...

Dear Foxy,

Yes I think I can. At the very least I'm detecting the stench of rat.

I just can't let go of what I've seen in organizations when someone is trying to dislodge somebody else: deprive them of information, including if or where meetings are happening; a raised eyebrow or smirk whenever their name or something they've accomplished is mentioned; a hint here; a snippet of information there; a few well chosen favours; some chaos or fear of same generated - with the incoming hero stepping up to straighten up the mess (they've purposefully created). Sorry but I have witnessed enough of these dynamics over time not to be nauseated at it.

Someone somewhere said something like, "Oh well this is how the game is played... that's politics."

Well it may be that JG has played as well as any of them - and she'll do a good job I'm sure. She can't do any worse than any of the male contenders I suppose. As some have already predicted, there's a good chance she'll depart office in the same manner in which she entered it - but someone else will be wearing the boot.

However, I always hope that feminism will change the ways in which organizations operate - the cut-throat go gettism; the selfishness and the notion that obtaining power justifies any means including opportunism and crushing people on the way.

My ideal would have been seeing a woman voted in; then working to change the organizational culture.

But alas.

Mind you, if I read much more about Julia walking on water I am likely to feel compelled to take a *completely* opposite position. At the least, that sort of crowing increases pressure on her to perform miracles and that's neither realistic nor helpful.

pynch

Foxy,

I guess the information that I read is simply a bit different to
yours. For one, I keep up to date with business information.Secondly
I live in a mining state, where Kevie's popularity had dropped
to 27%, so Labor caucus members knew that their seats were in for
the chop. Our perspective here, is a little different to downtown
Melbourne or Sydney.

Add in marginal seats in mining states like Qld and SA and Labor
were heading for the chop, enough caucus members could see the
writing on the wall.

*However, I always hope that feminism will change the ways in which organizations operate*

Yup Pymchme, but we know its a pipedream, for when it comes to
greed for money or power, many women behave much like many men
do, just perhaps with less open threats and even more deviant.

Just look at all those divorce battles, where the cleaner marries
the entrepreneur and then claws her way to every cent. I was amused
by the last Michael Douglas saga. He paid her our 45$ million
some 10 years ago, now he's made another movie and she is coming
back for more! So clearly women are not blessed with anything
special and there are extremely greedy women, as there are men.

Their tactics may just vary somewhat.

What Mat Lilley posted was his example of using temperate language to describe political action. Imagine how he'd go if he really got angry. Graham would never let any of his vituperation go to air,would you,Graham?
Matt is a real gentleman who has to learn to be a gentle and courteous man. I know you'll find it very hard Matt. All you right w(h)ingers are the same. Tony would love the email you sent in. But that's Tony. You can do better.Tony cant.

socratease

Yabby - I and just about any feminist would too I think. That's the point of it - we are all more than just our sex; we all have the same characteristics, strengths and weaknesses in varying degrees.

However, that's why seeing a female voted in by the public, who also had the strength to change organizational culture, would have held more satisfaction for me. If this turns out to be just a female acting like a bloke in a skirt and perpetuating the same dominant values well nothing much will be gained. Mind you, I await with reservation to see how she goes. If we just end up with an Aussie Mrs. Thatcher then nothing much will have been accomplished because social justice issues will remain pretty much as are. I don't see a revolution occurring just because she is a woman - I am a default setting of wait-and-see.

pynchme,

'However, I always hope that feminism will change the ways in which organizations operate - the cut-throat go gettism; the selfishness and the notion that obtaining power justifies any means including opportunism and crushing people on the way.

My ideal would have been seeing a woman voted in; then working to change the organizational culture.'

Hahahahahahahahahahaha

Have you listened to nothing I've said about power over the years on OLO. You really do believe women are somehow better people, and that men misbehaving in positions of power are doing so because of their gender, rather than the corrupting influence and necessary compromises.

I don't know whether it's comforting or scary that you are every bit as naive and misandrist as I thought you were.

'If this turns out to be just a female acting like a bloke in a skirt'

How offensive. To men in general, to women and to Julia.

I believe she will act like a person, a human, in a position of power.

*we are all more than just our sex; we all have the same characteristics, strengths and weaknesses in varying degrees.*

Hang on Pynchme, I would be surprised if Mrs Thatcher and JG
were not offended, for you thinking that they are not "real"
feminists.

You seem to be implying that what you would actually prefer
is somebody like Bob Brown in a skirt. That's not really
feminism but more just leftie green. Most of them have
big hearts but few of them can add up.

Matt,all this just after a few days of her becoming PM.
Tut,tut!!
You small-minded anti-feminist.There must be other toys you can find to play with. Go away and do that and stop making a fool of yourself on national websites.
socratease

Houellebecq:

<"You really do believe women are somehow better people...">

Re: Will JG prove to be another Mrs. Thatcher <"... how offensive...">

If I thought that women were automatically better people I wouldn't be wondering about whether or not we have another Mrs. Thatcher/pseudo male.

Feminism is a philosophy and way of being that does not value the bloodletting to get ahead, especially for personal gain, such as we see in the prevailing system.

Perhaps you could be in less of a rush to use made up words like the idiotic "misandrist" and take more time to think through the issue in a logical fashion. As to being 'offended' - shame you weren't offended more often and for worthier causes.

>'If I thought that women were automatically better people I wouldn't be wondering about whether or not we have another Mrs. Thatcher/pseudo male.'

Thanks for confirming. Wondering whether we have a faulty female, who is not acting like a real female, rather like the inferior male.

BTW: All words are made up. This one happens to be in most online dictionaries, and is well known to all but those who see most men as encapsulating the spirit of slave owners or deadly religious extremists.

I wonder how many 'pseudo male' type leaders pynch will have to see before the penny drops that it isn't the gender of the leader that is the defining factor. It will be hard for her to accept that power is corrupting, leadership requires leading and not pleasing everyone at once so conflict is inevitable, and that the history of humanity isn't actually a grand Adam vs Eve after all.

Houellebecq: Oh dear you're so sensitive. Sorry to have bruised your tender ego.

You're forgetting the first essential piece of information: Julia Gillard is a female!

The sentence therefore means that ANYBODY (male or female) can copy the worst behaviours of men in positions of power (which was a charge routinely made of Mrs. Thatcher).

Therefore, since JG is female, no female is automatically superior to any male in power.

(Btw you're starting to sound neurotic.)

*The sentence therefore means that ANYBODY (male or female) can copy the worst behaviours of men in positions of power*

Come on Pynchme, what about all the worst behaviours of women?
Men find it harder to just sleep their way to the top.
They are generally less bitchy, the list goes on.

You watch a couple of females fight over a bloke. The catfights
are unbelievable. Claws and nails and all.

True, true I can see what you mean overall Yabby.

"Men find it harder to just sleep their way to the top."

On the other hand women who do that aren't admired; almost all women who get anywhere are suspected of doing that (which has been very irksome for women who have worked hard and not used men who stupidly offer their sexual attentions); men usually don't have to - they have mentors and their own communication lines with people who can lend a hand up the ladder.

Women are only just starting to get a foothold in higher level powerful positions. That's a good thing; now we have to see whether as individuals they do a good job. I won't vote for anyone just because the contender is a female.

Come to think of it... I haven't voted for either of the two faces (Lib/Labor) of the one party (IMO) for a while. Undecided about which way my vote will go next time around.

The Australian two party system: "In any event...the real need for reform is not so much in the institutions of government as in the political parties. They have become narrowly based, factionalised, undemocratic oligarchies, apt to be controlled by too few people, closed to public view but open to manipulation and outright corruption. Reforming them would make the institutions of government work better without changing those institutions, but without reforming them the institutions cannot work very much better than they do at present." - Harry Evans, Clerk to the Senate in 'The Australian' 10 March 1997.

And I guess that Harry Evens was more qualified than most to make this observation...

pynch you're sounding more and more desperate (Even putting on that ol' patronising the little boy shuffle so common to a rad fem in a tight spot), and your argument is tying itself in knots.

'ANYBODY (male or female) can copy the worst behaviours of men in positions of power'

Of course, but that's not what you said. You used the term psuedo-male. A male cant be a psuedo male. So you therefore attribute the 'worst behaviours' of the male politicians to their maleness.

'which was a charge routinely made of Mrs. Thatcher'
Yes. The charge was that one would expect a woman to behave better than the previous array of male leaders due to being a women (ie the better gender), so the disenchantment with her had her labelled as being 'like a man'. That you lap this up confirms my point.

'Therefore, since JG is female, no female is automatically superior to any male in power.'

Not automatically, but expected. This is my point. Every new female leader pynch will expect to be better than all those nasty male ones. Then she will be disappointed every time. I had thought she would eventually learn it has nothing to do with gender, but obviously she just needs to cling to that men acting their gender stuff.