Ruting needs to move on. Howard has gone, never to return.

Watching Rudd is now the game, and when Ruting catches up, he will find that Rudd Government policies on terror suspects, illegal entrants and aboriginal policy will be much the same as they have been.

There might be big changes in welfare, though. Rudd is already talking about removing money from carers and pensioners handed to them by the Howard Government.

Wrong Mr Right, Evidence!

Why should he move on, why is that every time a person writes about the failings of a government and in turn the society that let it happen, move on without the right to examine and digest the past misdoings?
I'll tell you why, the notion of "Ok, l know but lets forget it and move on because we have work to do", IMO, smells of ignorance and arogances for if one wants to advance, one must remember and analyse the actions (or inactions) that caused these problems.
For 10 years l have watched a wonderful, informed and a intelligent electorate degenerate into a passive mob that believed in this era that, IMO, reeked of US style politics - both policy and electoral campaigns.
As much as "we" the public are to be blame for letting this happen, the Australian media must be accountable as well for it was it's duty to provide balance, if not, provoke community debate rather than the glorification of sporting teams or demises in celebrity.
I still believe that Australia can become the Australia that l can remember but it will take time - instead of the current Australia that reminds so much of the ills of the modern American society (hmmm are G.W.Bush Jr and J.W.Howard mates?)

THE AUTHOR SAID:

"Rather, it was founded on an ideological drive to reduce union power and benefit wealthy employers."

...err...and this drongo tells us not to fall for Howards rhetoric?

That little outburst was pretty ideologically packed to the point where you just about get a hernier trying to close the suitcase!

How about he get real and put it like this:

"It was founded on the idea of bringing balance to the power of Employers and Unions, and providing more choice to employees"

One only needs to ring up the CFMEU which includes a number of the old Stalinist BLF mob, and ask a few strategic questions, and also speak to some employers (a relative is a good start because talking with family they tend to just tell it like it is) and you quickly gain a more balanced understanding of what goes on.

There is extremism in both Union and Bosses.. but the rather large middle just want to get on with the job at reasonable rates of return, and remumeration for all.

This seems more like "Little Johnny is down.. now lets sink the boot in"

Let's not forget the protectionism that Howard extended to the private education sector and to professional groups like lawyers and doctors, allowing them to enjoy monopoly powers and government subsidies rather than competing openly in the marketplace. His 'deregulation' drive certainly didn't include his mates. And the huge amounts of industry welfare payments during the Howard years did nothing to produce a fair or sustainable economy.

BOAZ DAVID you wrong unionists to reach into the very bottom of a rotting heap of garbage to product the CFMEU!
They do not represent most workers.
Are as you say, but not Representative of all unions.
You have a right to think as you wish but Howard's crimes against low income workers who could not even afford to be in unions, the workchoices act was as bad as the worst union action.
No one surely would produce say iron bar Tucky as proof the whole conservative movement is not skilled in diplomacy so why use that union to represent the movement?

I believe Brad Ruting's assessment of John Howard and his rhetoric is spot on. He has written a balanced article which compares Howard's conservative ideals with the actual social impact of his political ideology and political strategies which caused so much division in Australian society.

It was an ideology formed in the political ferment that existed post war and through to the 70s in reaction to the perceived threat of Marxist influence in so many institutions, including trade unions, academic institutions etc with its spin off into labor politics. Howard saw it as his mission particularly to destroy unionism, both as industrial force and as a funding source for the ALP.

He pursued this outcome and from his perspective the need to retain his political power as a necessary corollary, with an intensity and narrow mindedness that damaged much of the Australian political fabric. He did this by his use of wedge politics over issues such as refugees, detention practices, his development of the outrageous Pacific Solution, and his politicisation of the bureaucracy and his mis-use of the military for his political purposes.