Re Bushbred's problem with local info disseminators and Palestine. Amazing how even the most progressive media units in this country seem to quail before this particular issue.
Of course mass media you gave up on ages ago- only Disneyland stuff contrasting the kind zionists and naughty towel-heads.
Almost like 1984, trying to find out the truth on some issues.

Bushbred, I must admit I didn't understand your comment. How was it related to my article? I don't see the growing activity of the reactionaries in Australia in the sphere of morals (perhaps as a consequence of their loss of real power and paradoxically with the support their casues receive from the new PM) as unlinked to the way the Palestinian disposession is portrayed here.

Maybe you could explain what you were getting at.

Yep, Passy, but must say as a historian I've lost my zest for personal discussion.

Further, going on 88 and outlived my darling wife, spend much of my time walking her dog and wondering why our leaders have not learnt the lessons of history - so much so in the Middle East, and of course, in Australia, where also as an old cockie, reckon apart from sport, we are really now stuck in the proverbial quarry economy, with pitstock billionares our only heroes.

Just wondering when it will all run out?

Dear bushbred

I understand your thinking. I have been dealing with grief and am now getting better finally.

I think the failure to learn from history is one of the great mistakes of our generation and the generations we have raised.

That's why I even appreciate conservative hsitorians who are serious in their task. I just disagree with the lessons and conclusions they draw. but at least they think and rationalise rather than just rant and rave.

As to the idea of when will it all end, this is an openended question and the context in which you ask it is not completely clear.

If you are referring to resources, then maybe the idea that resources are limited reflects a particlar social structure. It is certainly arguable however that the present relations of production may well be a fetter on the development of, for example, alternative energy sources.

In any event I wish you well. Keep taking the dog for walks. I find that one of the most enjoyable parts of my day. I talk to my mutt and imagine his responses, trying to nut out particular issues or systemic problems in capitalism, for example. In fact it has prompted me to think about a book tentativley entitled the political animal about a dog who travels around the world with his famous political exile of a master. he reports the cvonversations he had with him during their walks in various cities against a personal background of battles with various substances, family issues, the temptations of the flesh etc.

Anyway, enough of my ramblings.

I appreciate your contributions.

I must admit, I cringe when I hear all this moralising, it's something I've taken particular note of since that whole Monica Lewinsky affair.

Clinton lied, which was ultimately his undoing, but damn I'd have loved to have instead seen him respond to questions about his personal life with "my personal affairs have nothing to do with the state. No comment, because it's my business."

To have him impeached, no less, when it was revealed the reasons for the Iraq war were exaggerated at the very least, but with no impeachment... honestly. How many stuff ups has GW made which actually affect other people, instead of a single stained dress?

It seems this moralising has only stepped up since then. Yeah, the alcopop tax is a fine example, but they're everywhere. During the election, you couldn't open a newspaper without being hit with some supposedly significant piece of information about some MP or other, when in the majority of instances it was scarcely relevant to their duties.

So where does this lead us?

The most competent people get crucified if there is some foible in their personal life, regardless of its relevance. So the field is left open for the competent and incompetent, provided they meet the important criteria of never having experienced things which might offend such delicate sensibilities.

I'd rather have some MPs who've lived a little and aren't so cossetted.

Recently I noted in the US that there's being a bit of a reaction to this, when asked about marijuana smoking, Obama admitted he'd tried it and yes, he had inhaled at the time. Somehow, I think that refreshing honesty gained him more points than it lost because people are so damn sick of this over-the-top conservatism.

An excellent piece of food for thought. I, too am a blue-collar man and I and my mates often discuss the constant erosion of our rights and liberties in the name of one or the other "good reasons" that our Fearful Leaders have chosen as their wedge today. From The War on Terror to The Plight of Women to The Scourge of Drugs to The Cash Economy to Protecting Our Children to...

There is a real effort being made by Governments of all stripes to implement more and more Draconian laws to give them control over a populace that is increasingly divorced from the process of Government. Tony Abbott, when Health Minister, made a telling slip during an interview I saw, when he clearly made a distinction between those who use medical services and "the taxpayer". As personal income tax in this country has a net shortfall of around $5 billion vs personal rebates, benefits and grants, it's clear to see why he made that distinction. Corporate entities are "the taxpayer" and hence worthy of protection at all turns, whilst we, the people, are merely "beneficiaries" of the taxpayer's contribution. The smoke and mirrors propaganda is used to justify the reductions in our capacity to self-determine, while the large Corporates have the freedom to transcend restrictions at will, with little fear of consequence.

A further factor is the aging of our populations, since older people are frequently more prone to jumping at shadows and to be fearful of change. All a politician has to do is invoke a bogeyman and s/he may be sure of a large support base for "being strong". Once, he also had to risk a rotten tomato from those who disagreed, now he can hide behind press releases and tame journalists who regurgitate his inanities uncritically.

Historians will not be kind to those in power through the 90s and 00s and nor should we be today.