Steel, some thoughts/comments on your last post.

Concepts such as economic rationalism cover a pretty broad spectrum of interpretations and implementation. In one perspective it is about making sure that we can afford to do what we do, at the extreme end of the scale it requires that everything be quantifiable and paid for as close to the end user as possible. Likewise it is used to varying degrees by left and right.

Some on the right are opposed to scientific research that does not have an identifiable payoff just as many on the left are opposed because it diverts money from social programs. The US moon shots being a classic example of something that consumed a lot of money with no identifiable short term monetary benefits but which has according to some reports paid for itself about 30 times over in spin off technologies. Supported and opposed by left and right of politics.

My recollection is that Einstein was still doing the patent office thing when he wrote those famous papers - no research grants or public funding.

Conservatism does hold back progress but so to does change which just shifts the deck chairs. Often the left seems to want to run with the same or similar power structures, just change who holds the power. Again I don't see the left/right thing as a radical vs conservatism difference although it sometimes seems to play out that way. For me the core issue is about the personal freedom, responsibility and opportunity approach vs the state taking responsibility for those things.

R0bert

Hey Jolanda

Thanks for your response - I hope you didn't take offense.

I have reached the conclusion that 'right' and 'left' wing politics are terms that have become so distorted that they are irrelevant.

For example, left wing used to be considered 'radical' for promoting gay rights, women's equality. These days 'radical' can be used to describe the workplace reforms the Fed Gov have forced through.

Right wing used to be about tradition and a cautious approach to change. It has all become so convoluted. That is why labeling people 'rabid right' and 'luny left' is a lazy and pointless exercise.

I believe in a humane and fair approach to government and business. I believe in genuine capitalism - that is real competition - which is something that can't be achieved between monopolies. I believe that there are services which are essential to people's wellbeing and, therefore, should be controlled by government. All this means is that I find the Howard Gov morally repugnant and the Labor opposition inept.

So, I guess I am agreeing with the premise of James' article and that 'right' and 'left' are irrelevant and what is important is the wellbeing of all people and the best way to achieve this goal.

Ludwig, I apologise for my error and thank you for your feedback. I do not suppose you are a reporter [or better still an editor] for a more widely read publication? Perhaps one will read this and follow up, but I suspect we are right about intimidation. I hope I am wrong!

In answer to your "What has happened since?" [Albert Langer's release from jail], there's much more than I can type now but here's a link that may help. http://www.aph.gov.au/house/committee/em/elect04/subs.htm

Go to submission 151, which concerns illegal actions in and by the High Court to conceal the fact that Gary Hardgrave was illegally elected. Its one thing that the MPs on the committee suppressed the proven facts, but these submissions have parliamentry privilege, so there's no excuse for editors or media baron [like David Fagan & Rupert Murdoch] not following up and widely publicising the truth.

What about the publishers of 'On Line Opinion'? I see its Editorial Advisory Board is chaired by former ABC managing Director Brian Johns. Why not start asking Gary or his mate Senator George Brandis for their reactions to Darryl Wheeley's allegations?

Also I agree with James & Scout, that 'right' and 'left' are irrelevant and what is important is the wellbeing of all people and the best way to achieve this goal. Any dispute? Maybe its time to take a vote. Can we do that?

Hi Scout. Don’t worry, I don’t take offence. I appreciate that we all have different writing styles and ways of expressing our ideas.

Just with the Left and Right thing. My family came over from Spain over 35 years ago. I have mixed with a lot of nationalities, even married a Lebanese and my experience amongst immigrants is that the majority of them see it like this, and I know it off by heart as I have heard it all my life – “Liberal is for the Rich; Labor is for the Poor”. It is as simple as that. That is the main interpretation of Left and Right by the majority as I have seen it.

Labor has to keep people poor otherwise they will loose votes. Liberal doesn’t want too many to be rich otherwise there is more competition and, who will then do all the mundane jobs?

That’s why Labor does nothing whilst Liberal looks after their own so well.

Ludwig, I agree with you regarding growth and Scandinavian countries. Growth should be about sustainability, how that can be achieved here under a brain dead duopoly is beyond me, except for a total collapse of the system.

I believe that many of the politicians of the last 20 years should be charged with treason, corruption and false pretensions. The insanity of supporting privatisation that has stripped the populance of its assets and resources for a pittance is criminal, as is the growing financial support for multinationals and political vested interests, using our money to support their greed.

Anyone bringing forth policies that benefit the people and require politicians to be responsible for their actions, would see those people destroyed, as we have seen with Ms Hanson. Not being a supporter of hers, I still felt that she had some good ideas. So they trumped up charges and got rid of her, just like langer.

I would also be interested to hear what has happened since. As is pointed out be other posters, we have no choice, as our votes go to those we don't want to vote for and they will never change that.

Positive politics may come after collapse, when the current despots are removed. I think a positive step, would be for more people to run for parliament. With a lot of candidates, votes at the bottom would have a lesser effect and that may slowly change things.

We must remember that no matter what people say, when it comes to polling day, like slaves they just vote for the duopoly. Very few have the actual courage to place the major parties at the bottom and choose their own preferences. Their excuse, well they are going to be elected anyway. Or, if I vote for someone else my vote won't count. Just shows you the sheep like complacency of the enslaved in fear, mob.

Now with their new anti terror laws, they can silence anyone the want, a real fascist dictatorship. Sadly most will deny this, but time will reveal truth, as it always does.

Scout, a great post. The labels don't work well, as you correctly point out some of the current governments actions don't look like the Coalition is cautious about change (or from my perspective supporting freedom, responsibility, opportunity etc) and Labor appears to be useless.

Qld Labor is not exactly running a radical reform agenda either, rather stumbling from one self created crisis to another.

R0bert