One thing is for sure and that Mr Howard has gone out of politics with more dignity than Gough, Malcolm, Bob and Paul put togther.

Don't you mean ignominy, runner?

Did you actually read the article?

Dignity? He got clobbered & hasn't been game to show his face since. He & Hyacinth have attained ancient history status in the space of a month.

I was a little confused by this as well FrankGol. The language used here at times hints at a success story which can assert political gravity on Australian political dialogue, by sheer respect of its achievement, but the actual argument appears to be closer to something far more pedestrian. That is, that Howard will leave a legacy of political and cultural definitions and frames that will contest the soul of conservative ideology in Australia, and thus the goalposts of the modern Liberal Party, for a long time to come.

I think the second formulation is fairly uncontroversial, but even then there isn't really any effort put the argument as to exactly why Howard's terms of reference will win any such contestation in the future. Why, for example, wouldn't the Liberal Party become like the modern Tories in Britain or Canada, who more or less accept the small 'l' liberal consensus? The author doesn't tell us..

Yes, bennie, which is exactly what all ex prime ministers should do.

DIS

PART 1

THE ANSWER IS.....CHRIST!

yep.. might as well unfold my conclusion at the beginning :)

I find it quite fascinating that 'Christianity/Whiteness/Right/Conservative' are all lumped together and then.. to add further blemish to a very strange article, we get this.

at the centre and
-the encouragement of virtues of individual enterprise and aspiration.

Here is my problem......

"Christianity" says:

You are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus, for all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. 28There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. (Galatians 3:26)

So... how in the WORLD does this author get the idea that to be Christian means accepting INEQUALITY among people?

In fact.. I believe that Christians have an absolute right to SUE this author for religious vilification..and holding Christians up to serious public contempt!

Brother FrankGols' post confirms this.. as behind his crusading words is the undelying assumption, now re-inforced by the author's vilification implying Christians are bad, evil and don't care about non them. (specially if they are assylum seekers etc)