“Ludwig, that push for expansion is coming from the people themselves..”

Yabby, the apparently insurmountable push for expansionism comes from the powerful business sector that has the ability to destroy a candidate or incumbent leader.

The general community both supports expansionism and complains about tis negative effects; road congestion, insufficient water supply, health and education that are not keeping up with increasing demand, etc, etc. They generally don’t like high immigration. People in high-growth areas that have all the necessary facilities generally don’t like continued rapid population growth. The right leader could convince them that population stabilisation, a steady-state economy and a paradigm of sustainability are definitely the fundamental things to strive for.

But the big business sector is interested in increasing profits far above any other concerns.

So it is not just a simple tragedy of the commons scenario. It is a case of the rich and powerful, who are inherently aggressive in getting what they want, accumulating huge power, ruling the roost and continuing to be very aggressive, one-eyed and careless about the future wellbeing of our society.

“Politicians reflect what people want, or they are thrown out of office…”

No, it’s not that simple, because the people who want continuously rapidly increasing markets and labour forces have highly disproportionate power compared to those who want it all to be capped or would support it being capped if they heard a concerted message from our politicians or from high-profile learned people like Tim Flannery.

Thus, politicians don’t necessarily reflect what the majority of the community wants!

“Long term, unless we address the constant global population increase of 80 million or so a year, what Australians do hardly matters in the bigger scheme of things.”

Yes it does…to us! If our society starts to really crumble, then some other national force would be more likely to seize the moment and attempt to take us over. A population of 35 million in a struggling failing society is hardly going be a bigger deterrent than 23 million in a strong coherent society.

“the public are spoonfed through the media.”

TRTL, they pretty much are, aren’t they? I mean, how else does the public get to know what our pollies and big companies are up to?

“ 'corporate Australia' is some kind of malicious entity that operates with any kind of cohesion.”

No. They are just pursuing their interests, which is ok….and criticising decision-makers that don’t do what they want, which is also understandable. The problem is that they have vastly more power than opposing forces. They are a pretty cohesive force, and not particularly malicious….most of the time!

“That this ambiguous entity waves some kind of magic wand and the media falls to heel.”

Not in such simple or direct terms, but in effect it is not far from the truth.

“It's more the fact that as you yourself have said, our economic system is predicated on growth.”

Yes. Totally. To the extent that a leader or aspiring leader wouldn’t dare to question it in any way, for fear of incurring suspicion in the mighty corporate sector. And yet it is this very growth… or by far the largest component of it; rapid population growth, that we desperately need to be reigned in. The other main part; economic growth due to improved efficiencies, renewable energy sources and technological advances, is the bit that we should be encouraging all the way.

So, as you say, if a leader can’t figure out that he needs to “project an image that shows” that he is “capable of assisting corporate Australia to achieve that growth”, then he won’t get elected. That’s pretty much the same as the quote that you object to, as far as I can see.

Kevin Rudd and Julia Gillard are an unlikely couple. Lawyers basically worship Temple made Law, and KR regularly goes to church, and identifies with thirteen and a half million other Australians.

The Big Business that KR and Julia should be reining in are the robber Judges, who run the eight other States in Australia. The Republics established themselves after the Australia Act 1986 was refused at a referendum. States and Territories are simply thieving Principalities, organized and run by Judges for lawyers.

Kevin Rudd is the first honest leader in nearly sixty years. He has picked some very good young Ministers. Chris Bowen, Minister for Competition Policy. Bill Shorten, Secretary for Disabilities, Tanya Plibersek as Minister for Housing. But unfortunately stuck with Robert McClelland for Attorney General.

Chris Bowen is hunting cartel behavior, and the biggest and most destructive cartel in Australia is the one run by Judges. If the Federal Court of Australia would compete for business, with the Supreme Court in each State, as directed by the Trade Practices Act 1974 and abide S 45 Trade Practices Act 1974 and include 12 ordinary people in every proceeding, as the “judges" mandated by S 79 Constitution, 300,000 badly put upon subjects of the Queen resident in corporate New South Wales, could get their driving licences back, and not have to fear the Police. Further enormous benefits would follow.

With few exceptions the only Church the lawyers attend are the Temples of The Judges or Magistrates, erected in 1970 in New South Wales and elsewhere in Australia afterwards, where they daily oppress the hapless citizens of the eight republics. These dishonest individuals, are unable to comprehend that the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights was legislated into law as Schedule 2 to the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission Act 1986.

Likewise they accept the Australia Act 1986 though it contradicts itself. The Trade Practices Act 1974 should be applied, and State Sovereignty abolished. If Lindsay Tanner who would abolish the States, was made Attorney General taxes would be lowered and States pulled back into line after 60 years

No, Ludwig, they're entirely different.

So the media is easily wielded by the powerful to manipulate the masses?
This is a favourite theory in academia, but in the real world it's garbage.
The media just seeks whatever people will read to turn a buck. The 'manipulation' only ever turns in the favour of that media outlet.
Sometimes this will be in sync with 'corporate Australia'.
Sometimes it isn't.
Obama for example, has put forward a tax plan that will dramatically increase the taxes on the wealthiest few percentile of the American population, effectively returning it to the 37 per cent tax bracket that existed under Clinton. In return he will cut taxes for lower income earners. This will still provide a large boost of revenue, because the profits of the top few have skyrocketed in the last few years and taxing them that little bit extra will give much more to the government.

This tax is not in the interests of corporate America, however it panders to the masses quite well and thus, the media idolize Obama because more people will read it.
The interests of corporate America and the profits of the media do not dovetail in this instance, so the interests of the media have won out.

The reality is people understand our system is predicated on growth. They understand that if a politician is so inept as to be unable grasp this concept and work with business, they will fail under this system which will hurt the hip pocket of the voters.
Plus, if they're inept, they'll look, well, inept.

They are completely different different. It's common to consider the media the mere tool of the powerful, but that's simplistic and intellectually dishonest.

If the people are conservative, they believe the media is controlled by the liberal 'elite'. The reverse is also true.
If they have issues with corporates, they think the media is controlled by those corporates.
You'll find the corporates think the media is too focused on pandering to the public.

It's just the most fashionable way to shoot the messenger.

It is difficult to actually explain the media, but it would be safe to assume that the Leftoid secular indoctrination is a guiding black hole.

The other great travesty of Socialist Ideology is the very basic tenant of Envy, but of course the calibres of persons who proselytise these idiotic virtues are far from being needy , quite the opposite ; and to appeal to the level of the already fractured and state dependant constituents to keep the morons in power.
The obvious lay in some practical application of mathematics, in record tax receipts taken by Socialist Governments in the last 12 odd years State and Federal , everything around us is falling apart, and services are near paralysed and it is quite reasonable to use language that describes Australia as nearing on Third world ;- but with First class Criminals who consider the Gravy train is their right , by paradigm shifts and simple manipulation of language , and it is deliberate.

If someone can explain how Tax payers can enter into a contract with supposed private enterprise – to build info structure at a cost of 5 hundred million , and the tax payer is compelled to pay 1 and a half billion dollars to compensate for the entities losses , it just cost the taxpayer 3 times more than the value of what it was to build it- and a repetitive scenario throughout Australia;- I would be writing million page books to describe the Tax payer funded Criminal conspiracy and incompetence.

Total collapse is all that is left and that be right. No turns available. The Looting must end now , at all levels.

“The reality is people understand our system is predicated on growth”

TRTL, this is your most fundamental point: that a leader simply MUST show that he will pander to growth if he is to be elected and stay in office. And yet this is the most fundamental thing that needs to be countered.

This absurd imbalance between humanity and nature is promulgated within our political system at this most fundamental level. Not only is this imbalance this entrenched, but a continuous worsening of it is this entrenched!

The media is part of this fundamentally entrenched growth ethic (or antiethic!).

If the people were told that our economic system didn’t have to be predicated on continuous growth, or that the only part of growth that we should be encouraging is the bit due to technological innovation, they’d be very receptive.

What is the average person supposed to make of the media that continuously toes the expansionist line?

Many understandably feel as though big business has the media wrapped around their little finger. I don’t it is quite like that, but in effect it is not far from the truth.

Sure, the media put out stories that run counter to the interests of individual companies or even to the whole show, indirectly. But do they ever put out the sort of thing that I espouse here and many others agree with; net zero immigration, steady-state economy, whole of society predicated on no expansion and genuine sustainability? Nope!

One of the great delights for me was discovering that in expressing this on OLO, there was a great deal of like-mindedness being expressed back. This was in stark contrast to my ten or so years of pushing the same sort of message through letters to the editor and articles in newspapers.

So, whether the media is actually controlled by the “elite” or whether they just go along with the dominant social and economic paradigm is moot. The effect is the same; the manipulation of the masses to unquestioningly accept never-ending expansionism instead of striving for a manageable size to our population, economy and society.