We certainly know which method our current fearless leader prefers, I prefer love, it may be a little more compicated however in my humble opinion the results are worth the effort.

So much for serious thought!

The rhetoric of politicians is not so limited as to be reserved to just one of the deadly sins. There are some pollies who can work through the full seven in one short interview and regularly do just that. To take but one example, what about the intergenerational jealousy that is regularly revived because of its success in hooking the easily led in the community?

Australia needs statesmen who appreciate and live by the seven holy virtues of chastity, abstinence, liberality, diligence, patience, kindness, and humility.

Leigh,
Sorry mate, do you also have trouble with the truth. My comments were truthful, so much so that it appears you could not comment yourself.

Never mind mate, you will enjoy the Rudd Labor Government.

“ I prefer love, it may be a little more compicated however in my humble opinion the results are worth the effort.”

I wonder Shonga whether we could have loved Hitler into not persecuting the millions of jews? Maybe if we could have loved Saddam a bit more he wouldn’t have gassed his own people. Slobodan Milosevic could surely have been diverted from his evil ways if we just loved him a little more? This Pollyanna nonsense seems to always come from people who live in the safety and warmth of a democracy which people fought and died for.

“We certainly know which method our current fearless leader prefers”
So the events of 7/7, Madrid, 9/11, Bali (twice), plus all those that were prevented or contained, were figments of our imagination? Bush/Blair/Howard concocted these events to mess with our civil liberties in order to remain in gov’t? What they really want is a police state?

Howard, who I am not a fan of, has a responsibility for our safety. In a world in which the nature of threats to the community has changed so rapidly, it is possible that we are overreacting. It also quite possible that we are under reacting and this was in fact the case for Australia before both WW1 and WW2.Under reacting did not work out well for us then

Its called risk management, something I’m sure the global warming advocates out there would well understand

Sometimes, it is worth reading the stuff before you sneer.

Paul.L wrote:

>>I wonder Shonga whether we could have loved Hitler into not persecuting the millions of jews? Maybe if we could have loved Saddam a bit more he wouldn’t have gassed his own people. Slobodan Milosevic could surely have been diverted from his evil ways if we just loved him a little more?<<

If you look back at the quote, Paul.L, you will find:

"Machiavelli wrote that rulers could control their subjects with either love or fear but fear was simpler"

You see, it is the rulers that are exercising the love/fear, not the subjects. So your mockery of Shonga's preference that our leaders should avoid the path of least resistance and instill fear into the population at every possible turn, falls pretty flat.

It is nothing to do with whether "we" love Hitler or Milosevic or Pol Pot. It is the manner in which our leaders, having been elected by us, decide to treat us.

And I'm with Shonga. The "control by fear" mentality is far too easy. It should not be beyond the wit of our esteemed leaders to treat us less like objects to be controlled, and more like partners in a joint venture.

Except of course, most of them are lawyers. Whose empathy glands are forcibly removed before they are allowed to practice.

pericles, the problem is that while our masters may be smart enough to treat us well, maybe they don't want to.

that's why we should be smart enough to get along without them.

Dear Doctor,

I read your piece carefully, in an attempt to determine what exactly it is that you're attempting to elicit (if anything) from the good readers herein ?

Apart from providing a synopsis of your past family member's involvement in the two major wars - and the individual sporting prowess of your grandfather. I'm at a complete loss as to what it is, that you're actually trying to say, Doctor ?

I see that you draw several references to the severe emotional disturbances occasioned (again) by members of your family. Using words and terms, such as 'battle fatigue'; PTSD ; and 'thinking too much' ?

I'm a veteran, and I'm being treated for PTSD at both, the Austin Repatriation Hospital, Melbourne and at the Vietnam Veterans' Counselling Service, also in Melbourne.

I must say there is nothing that gets up my nose quicker, than people who've never ever worn 'greens' telling all and sundry about PTSD and related conditions ! Of course I readily defer to your position as a Medical Practitioner. I'm sure that you have a pretty good handle on the condition too (from a medical viewpoint).

I'm referring to those banal academics who bore us all with their tedious rhetoric, generally about matters that they know very little about, save from what they've garnered from some weighty tome or other.

When it comes to such delicate emotional issues such as PTSD, these people endlessly pontificate on their chosen subject, as if what they utter, is absolutely incontrovertible ! Trouble is folks, when they go on about war, or the effects of war, most have never seen an angry man, ever ! As I said herein, it really gets up my nose !

Cheers...sungwu.

I think the author wanted to link 'bad' people as leaders caused most of the disasters in history...a few things should have been elaborated...and as a medical doctor I hope nobody minds...

Love is a 'feeling' that is on a scale of feelings...simply if 'middle point' is feeling 'normal' then on + side is 'liking' to 'attachment' to 'love' as extreme...on -ve side 'dislike' to 'hate' to 'fear' as extreme...

'middle point' is a hard one as we identify it as what is our predominantly usual state...but not actually at normal/middle...eg...imagine the feeling after years of being in a prison where everyone dislikes you...to being in a palace where everyone likes you...and yes...before anyone asks...most of us are in general state of -ve ie emotional pain in this world we have/allowed created...

Two more needed to generally understand this issue with people,;
-connected/disconnected to our situation ie dynamincally responding feelings in real time...or not(net search with psychology+affect will give more)
-current state of psychological funtioning leading to behaviour...ie normal range, compensated or decompensated...eg takes us all back to jungle without weapons...only the 'normal range' will survive...in our world even the 'deranged' escape detection by manipulative skills to survive...

So for example...childhood(especially under 6ie before psychological defence mechanisms reasonably developed)intentional and reckless psychological abuse for behaviour control with fear by dominant parent...leading child to 'dissociated defence' to seek relief from severe ongoing emotional pain eg create happier-make-believe world...this goes into adulthood as multiple social faces/personality...where the real person is lost in the falsity...and main drive is avoid fearfull situations...the best is be the controller of fearful states and voila...feeling better already...as dictator/queen witch...

Sam
Ps~those whom are 'disconnected' will find this difficult to relate to...bodies naturally responding feelings are very supressed...so harder to understand explanation on feelings...

Pericles,
Actually what Machiavelli said was “It is best to be both feared and loved, however, if one cannot be both it is better to be feared than loved." And I did read “the stuff”

When Machiavelli talked of ruling through fear he meant fear of the Prince himself. That is the prince was to be a ruler to be feared by all, subjects as well as other princes. He was not talking about making the subjects fear other princes etc.

I know it is the rulers exercising the love/fear. My point regards Saddam< Milosevic is still valid. If our leaders loved our enemies where would we have been? I just don’t accept your argument that the gov’t is trying to control us by keeping us in fear.

Most people aren’t afraid of terrorism because the gov’t is scaring them. They’re actually afraid because some people in our communities support the IslamoFascists and may be stupid or evil enough to try and emulate them. Most people are concerned that there are those who hate Australia/Australians and wish to do us harm, living amongst us. Since we have never faced a similar situation before I think that a cautious approach is mandated. If some of us have to accept a little inconvenience I don’t think that is to high a price to pay. I mean how many of you would prefer that they didn’t take swabs from clothing looking for explosives when you get on a plane? How many would prefer that baggage is not checked?

Fully support what you say about lawyers though.

Sam Said,
My background is in a highly technical field, although I have studied plenty of politics and sociology. What is clear to me is that when people use lots of large words they are normally lacking in a basic understanding of what they are trying to say.

Same here o sung wu. Not the PTSD bit, but the confusion over the message the author is trying to convey here. I wouldn't take the PTSD references so much to heart if I was you - the doc seems to have the best of intentions. I think. Maybe.

Gunn has a beautiful way with words but that's not an awful lot of good if you can't get the message across.

HD for brilliant use of linguistic resources, but to get a pass you need at least one clear argument.

Absolutely, but you have to agree that is not what you said Paul.L.

>>I know it is the rulers exercising the love/fear.<<

And I'm not quite sure how this works out when you were clearly addressing your remarks to Shonga...

>>My point regards Saddam< Milosevic is still valid. If our leaders loved our enemies where would we have been?<<

...because that wasn't what Machiaveli was saying either.

But no matter.

>>I just don’t accept your argument that the gov’t is trying to control us by keeping us in fear. Most people aren’t afraid of terrorism because the gov’t is scaring them.<<

The second sentence, if you believe the first, is redundant - if the government is not, as you say, using fear as the driver to control our activities, then how can they scare anyone?

But the level of propaganda, from the "alert levels" in the UK to the fridge magnets here in Australia are designed not to reassure, but to make sure people are fearful. If you tell people "be alert, not alarmed", what is the first thing you think? That there must be something to be alarmed about, of course.

It's largely a matter of trust. We don't trust them to do the right thing, so we are eternally suspicious of their motives.

Sometimes, with justification.

When I first arrived in Queensland the high level of fear among Queensland teachers struck me right away. I could not understand the anxiety of the teachers to "go with the flow" because nothing in my previous career had prepared me for an employer who "ruled by fear".
Twenty years later, I understand the fear of Queensland teachers. My "glorious heroics" are described in http://www.badapplebullies.com/investigations.htm
I have tried to warn other teachers about the brazen abuse of the official Departmental "investigative processes".
But to this day I see no sign of change.
I would not recommend a career as a Queensland teacher to any intelligent person.
You will live and work in a state of fear.

Be afraid, be very afraid the new Howard biography suggests he knew workers would be worse off under Workchoices and went ahead, that is the Howard "fear factor" component as living proof.

This article is supported by the fact that the Saudi government is successfully re-programming terrorist sympathisers who have been convicted of lesser crimes such as distributing terrorist material. Apparently individuals who have completed this program have not re-offended to date. The program teaches the truth about the Koran and provides a warm and fuzzy environment. Hopefully the justice systems in Australia may consider this approach and provide more resources in catching and dealing with minor offenders such as car thieves and vandals before they move onto more violent crimes.

Krustyburger,
Yes that would be a progressive thought, however it won't happen under va conservative government. If you look up the word "conservative" in any dictionary you won't find meanings such as progressive, innovative etc. What you will find is institutions and other old fashioned style regressive ideas.

It seems that Labor party supporters have been organised to blanket-blog On Line Opinion with anti-Howard propaganda.

Is anybody else finding this a little tedious?

Yes, we get the message: Howard him very bad man.

Thank you for that.

Hi there all you good people...

To: (a) 'Dealing with the Mob & (b) 'Leigh' -

I agree with both of you, absolutely !

I'm a veteran and a retired copper. I possess very little formal education (NSW Intermediate Certificate, 1957), save for a number of 'In-service Courses', so I certainly don't have a 'penetrating' vocabulary that most of you have.

However, if Australia is again to be afflicted with another Federal Labor Government, under the apparent stewardship of Mr. Kevin Rudd, with Ms. Julia Gillard as his deputy, then I have very grave fears indeed for our future.

Australia, under the aegis of Mr. John Howard and his cohorts, hasn't done all that badly in my view.

Interestingly, whenever there's a mention of a federal election, the same old issues are again resurrected by the left, and some members of the media. Tampa; the war in Iraq; the close ties our PM appears to enjoy, with the President of the United States, etc... ad nauseam.

I find it quite amazing really, that many of the denunciatory remarks, levelled at PM. Howard, involve language of a kind, that is highly invective, in the extreme ! In fact, in some respects the words employed, and intention of those words, have manifestly given rise to a very real apprehension of physically violence ! Directed towards an individual who just happens to occupy the hightest office in the land.

As I said herein, I really shudder at the thought of a very real possibility, a Federal Labor Government may become a reality, toward the end of the year.

Back to having the country run and controlled by powerful Trade Unions. Back to economic incompetency. Back to a time of powerful 'faceless' individuals orchestrating deals of questionable morality...et al.

God help us, is all I can say.........................?

Krusty burger, What hope do WE have of telling Muslims what is and isn't right about Islam? Here are some Sheik Hilali quotes, there are many more just as vile

“Judaism controls the world by…secret movements as the destructive doctrines and groups, such as communism, libertinism, Free Masons, Baha’ism, the Rotary clubs, the nationalistic and racist doctrines. The Jews try to control the world through sex, then sexual perversion, then the promotion of espionage, treason, and economic hoarding”

"September 11 is God's work against oppressors. Some of the things that happen in the world cannot be explained; a civilian airplane whose secrets cannot be explained if we ask its pilot who reached his objective without error, who led your steps? Or if we ask the giant that fell, who humiliated you? Or if we ask the President, who made you cry? God is the answer
He also said
• British and Irish settlers arrived in Australia as convicts. Muslims paid for their own tickets, and so have more right to Australia
• Prison sentences handed down to Lebanese-Australian Muslims for the Sydney gang rapes were excessive and influenced by the September 11, 2001 attacks in the USA
• Western people, especially the English race, are the biggest liars and oppressors

How are we going to have any effect on Muslim youth when their Imams say things like this. Oh and by the way he was Muslim of the Year in Australia in 2005. The Council of Islamic Jurisprudence and Research reappointed Hilaly as Grand Mufti on 10 June 2007, thankfully he declined.

So it is clearly we who are failing young Muslims. Isn’t it?

I'm wondering SHONGA if you use the word "progressive" ironically or not, when referring to your politics. Usually when people apply an intrinsically "good" label to themselves such as "I'm smart, I'm generous, I'm compassionate, I'm progressive" it is either ironical/self-effacing (they recognise that it is only partially true) or else (if not) then a sure sign that that person is a tosser, desperately trying to elevate their own feelings of inferiority/lack of self-worth by narcissistic self-praise. ie no-one else has noticed how "good" they are;how "smart,generous,compassionate,progressive" they are, so they blow "their own trumpet". Anyway, I'm sure you'll now let us know that you WERE ironical and not the other. Cheers.

As for "fear", I'm not sure how this translates into voting intentions. Is "fear" of negotiating your own AWA (ie you are a timid loser, unable to interact in an adult manner with another adult) going to make you vote Labor? Is "fear" of Aborigines coming off the reserves and moving into your suburb, going to make you vote Labor (ie these Aborigines may wish to be protected from endemic violence, in the same way as yourself)?
Is "fear" of having some Leb living up the street, going to make you vote Labor to "encourage" multiculturalism (ie to keep them in their "own" ghetto instead of being assimilated into YOURS). Ah, so many silly ( note;irony SHONGA) questions. Cheers again.