An optimistic theory Peter, but I'm afraid I see no real evidence of the majority of Australians giving a stuff about issues such as global warming, integrity in politics and the like. People are so focussed on material accumulation that they have totally vacated the sphere of serious discussion about politics, society, the environment, the community, if they were ever there in the first place. They have relinquished any interest in those areas, in exchange for the belief that all they want their leaders to do is to keep interest rates and petrol prices down, and give tax breaks now and again. And they have been fooled into thinking that (some) politicians can do this long term.

The increasing concentration of media ownership, and the continued dumbing down of media content is likely to encourage the continuation of this trend.

I hope I'm wrong, but I think Australia is irrevocably set on a path of "look after number one, damn the environment and the community, who cares about integrity and honesty, and blame the underprivileged for their own plight".

Parties need numbers to win elections - and I'm not sure that Peter's article examines this sufficiently.
There seems to be an assumption in the intelligencia that people vote for issues. I think this is only partly so. I think people vote for people - the person that they like or trust. They do this even if they don't know or understand the issues. At the extreme there are voters who do not understand English, and voters who do not follow the news. Yet they vote, and it's certainly not on issues.
I think it's time that journalists and commentators acknowledged that many people vote without connecting to the much discussed "issues" and "trends" and "spin".

AMSADL - you are responding to Peter McMahon' s article in an intelligently pessimistic way.
However, I don't think that we can afford to be pessimistic. For one thing, even if Australia does proceed towards doom in its current mindless materialistic way - what are we going to say to our children and grandchildren - when they ask "What were you doing about it?"
I congratulate Peter McMahon on giving us some intelligent hope - that "content will eventually triumph over form".
We've seen how the asbestos, chemical, pharmaceutical and above all - the tobacco, and now the nuclear, industries have exerted their spin.
But people are waking up to spin. Things are changing. The Howard government is not necessarily a friend to business and industry, as many are finding.
It's not all that hard to see through spin. You don't have to be an "expert". There are just two critical questions:
1. What's in it for whom?
2. Does this really make sense?
Christina Macpherson www.antinuclearaustralia.com

Brilliant article Dr. McMahon. A breath of fresh air to someone like myself, but I doubt such political foresight will evolve quickly enough to save us from ourselves. John Howard is a tired old man with tired old ideology and yet he always draws a crowd. Unfortunately this ideology is out of touch with reality and with present and emerging problems such as Global warming and peak oil, however that shouldn't be surprising since John Howard is only a puppet for big business, especially the oil industry and the US Government. It is also unfortunate that their main opposition has become much too aligned with Liberal policy and have found themselves like a beached ocean liner who left her course due to bungling within her navigational crew. It will take a one in one hundred year flood to float them again. Christina, you're correct in saying that we can't afford to be pessimistic, but what can we do when young and emerging voters idolise John Howard and who, like their parents, continue to strive towards material wealth and the latest "toys." I've spoken to work colleagues about environmental issues, but they're too busy working towards their third or fourth rental investment properties to bother to listen. Even one of my sons derides me for "attempting to take him out of his comfort zone" as he struggles with a dream to pay off his house and forge a material future for his wife and children. And so at times I too feel the pessimism of AMSADL, but I refuse to give up on the notion that one day politics will evolve into something akin to the vision of Dr. McMahon.

The problem is that the US paradigm of free market, free enterprise is unchallenged by any external constraint. It has become the modern equivalent of FEUDALISM. Our politicians are nothing more than eager Barons in that system.

But feudalism has failed every time in history. What does that tell us now in an age of infomopoly? It tells us that WE are going to have to insist on CEOs being accountable not only to shareholders but also to the general public. Otherwise the current system will degenerate into rebellion and revolution just as it has done throughout the age of man when essential freedoms are abased.

To get control of CEOs we need to show the US that ITS CEOs are negligently contributing to terrorism by alienating communities in third world countries. They buy their land, property, utilities, governments and even their prettiest women cheaply and then inflate the prices of those commodities to gain rich stakeholdings that are, according to Donald Rumsfeld, enforcable by US military might.

If the US Congress ever really understands the root cause of terrorism and focuses on clipping the wings of their CEOs then Australia will have the accountable governments WE all truly desire.

People need to post comments about this issue on US forums which are far more abundant than the slim offerings in Australian media.

I believe the US Congress will act in good conscience here as the US is under mounting pressure from terrorism the world over and they will act if they can be shown positive solutions with calming influences on world touble spots.

As I recently said on one US forum: "When the early Americans finegled Manhattan from the indians the numbers ratio was 20:1 against the indians. But now the ratio is 6.5 billion to 300 million or about 20:1 against the US. If you rein in a few thousand CEOs they will get NASTY, but eventually just do a Kenny Lay. If you increase stakeholdings in the third world, unabated, it will set our lives alight with terrorism, fear and hatred.

That is interesting about the PM wanting to flog off WA gas to the highest bidder. It ties in with more troops to Iraq and the closing of the Vestas wind turbine factory in northern Tasmania due to lack of support for renewables. It seems the PM thinks she'll be right mate when it comes to energy.