The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > The moral degeneration of the Labor Left > Comments

The moral degeneration of the Labor Left : Comments

By Marko Beljac, published 15/1/2010

The Labor Left likes to pretend that it is the conscience of the Party, yet in reality it has become a self serving faction.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. All
A good article touching on interesting areas.

I think Rudd as well as the Labor Left realise that to stay in power they need to compromise their previously held ideals. Maintaining unity, ie avoiding, wedges is the main game for staying in power.

A major area of risk aversion for the Rudd Government is over nuclear power. In principle nuclear would be the ideal carbon reduced form of power but for Rudd to float nuclear risks a deep wedge/disunity in the Labor Party so he doesn't touch it.

Supporting the dirty brown coal power industry is part of Labor's climate change legislative package because it keeps Victorian Labor (that brown coal state) onside. There is also the pathetically cynical claim that brown coal is OK - because economical carbon capture MAY be developed in 20 years. While Labor supports brown coal (the worst power source climater wise) it shuns nuclear, the cleanest, most proven power source. As nuclear would divide the residual Labor Left from Labor people who are mature.

Another way to see defence spending on the 12 submarines is national, technical and industrial development. Such concepts apply across international political divides from China to the US to here. Every major country supports a large defence industry - even Japan.

So there is nothing inherently immoral in Australia taking industrial measures to defend itself. The devil is in such details as hopefully choosing a long range development of the HDW 214 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_214_submarine - to be built in Australia.

Pete
Posted by plantagenet, Friday, 15 January 2010 12:02:15 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
They should leave labor and join the greens. Labor is no longer representative of the left. They have been captured by power mongering and the big end of town regularly bends them over for a serve.
Posted by mikk, Friday, 15 January 2010 4:32:15 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Interesting how often people of the far left attack their fellow lefties for being traitors. Similar things happen on the far right and among fundamentalists of each religion (some of whom also kill each other). It's that old totalitarian argument that "If you're not with me, you must therefore be against me".

People don't disavow extreme political views because they are treacherous. They do so because they grow up.

Trying to resurrect socialism is a lost cause. Even the few remaining socialists don't believe in it any more. Good God, Fidel Castro has been behaving more like royalty than the real royals - managing his own succession and making it into the Forbes 500!

The overwhelming majority of Australians are gathered near the middle of the political spectrum. Some may be rusted on Liberal or Labor supporters, but the differences in political view are not all that great. The major political parties have, at long last, come to reflect that. Of course, there'll always be a far left fringe as there will be a far right fringe. But both extremes cling to old and thoroughly discredited doctrines just as the religious fundamentalists cling to a doctrine written in our ancient past.

Socialism, fascism and religious fundamentalism have, between them, committed almost all of the genocide and sheer misery that the human race has had to endure throughout its recent history. Good riddance to the lot of them!
Posted by huonian, Friday, 15 January 2010 9:07:53 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I consider myself a socialist, a liberal and a democrat. To address the specific issue of belief in socialism - well that must depend on your interpretation... There was a time when many thought of socialism as a fully centralised command economy... My own interpretation is that of a democratic mixed economy.

re: the 'crimes' of 'socialist' 'regimes' - the abuses of the Stalin regime have long been abhorred by most on the Left. But let us not forget - also - that supposededly liberal and democratic governments supported murder and slaughter - including of civilians - on a scale most people really could not get their minds around... Hundreds of indigenous people slaughteredin Gautemala, mass slaughter of leftists and those in the labour movement in Indonesia, the Vietnam war, Pinochet's coup in Chile...

The death toll climbs into the hundreds of thousands - maybe millions... I don't blame liberalism and I don't blame democracy. There are interests which exploit the system to further their interersts - and in the process abandon principles... Here the same is true of many governments and states which are 'liberal democratic' as states and governments which proclaim themselves 'socialists'.

Liberty, democracy and social justice are all important - and need not conflict overly with each other... Through popular mobilisation, though, we need to end the cynicism and lies - and apply genuinely the real values of socialism, liberalism, democracy... We need to stop the cynical exploitation of these ideas and values - by those who at the core are really only interested in 'straight power concepts'... Then maybe we'll see how liberalism, socialism and democracy are really meant to look like!!
Posted by Tristan Ewins, Friday, 15 January 2010 9:36:10 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
re: indigenous people in Gautemala - I made a type - I meant hundreds of THOUSANDS slaughtered....
Posted by Tristan Ewins, Friday, 15 January 2010 9:37:33 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
huonian,

I agree with you. "The overwhelming majority of Australians are gathered near the middle of the political spectrum".

But as the policy failures mount in coming years, we may see some of the older divisive issues re-emerge to once again represent greater political division. On the other hand, you may be right and we may not as most Australians may still conclude that extreme ideas from the left or right are not magical.

No matter which way we go, there will be consequences as the world gets tougher. Greater domestic protection will deny poorer nations opportunities, and more of the same will cause greater domestic policy difficulties.

I hate to be a bit pessimistic, but it beats being part of the simplistic left who write and talk in a language barely reflective of reality. Anyone who knows politics well should have realised long ago that Obama and Rudd (Labor) would not deliver many of their promises. Now with all the policy difficulties exposed, the left just turn in on themselves and even criticise their supposed saviours. Who said religion was dead in Australia?

It is great to be visionary and build bridges to address inequality, but the left should at least recognise ongoing difficulties when they promote their vision to save the world.
Posted by Chris Lewis, Saturday, 16 January 2010 7:16:09 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Both the Labor and Liberal parties are an integral part of our current oligarchy therefore there will be little to differentiate them.They will attempt to sell some sort of difference to fool the proles but it is like putting lipstick on a few of the pigs.

Political change in Australia will have to come from the bottom up.With the current prevailing complacency and unconsciousness I am not holding my breath waiting.

What is needed is some profound shock/s.The global situation suggests that to be not too far away.
Posted by Manorina, Saturday, 16 January 2010 8:42:13 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Manorina “What is needed is some profound shock/s.The global situation suggests that to be not too far away.”

Ah yes as I have been warning, well quoting really, Per Lenin,

“A revolution is impossible without a revolutionary situation”

And he would know and doubtless the labor left will be queueing up to be his (Lenin’s) contemporary “useful idiots”

Sooner or later the left are just going to have to come out and declare their true colours.

Maybe, as mikk suggests, come out and join the greens, they did infiltrate that movement years ago anyway.

Mind you hounian suggests “Socialism, fascism and religious fundamentalism have, between them, committed almost all of the genocide and sheer misery that the human race has had to endure throughout its recent history. Good riddance to the lot of them!”

I must admit I do like that idea
Tristan might compare the outrages of Stalin to Pinochet but
Just look below the surface of that deceit

While Pinochet might have killed people in their hundreds

Stalin, Lenin, Mao, Pol Pot and the dingbat in North Korea have done the same but in the millions

“Then maybe we'll see how liberalism, socialism and democracy are really meant to look like!!”

The problem is, Tristam’s “model” sets up the opportunity for the Stalin’s, Lenin’s, Mao’s, Pol Pot’s and the dingbat’s in North Korea to take over.

Better to stick with libertarian capitalism

It might not be perfect but at least you get the chance to criticize it and perhaps even change it,

socialism pursues the goal of establishing a leveled “Status Quo”,

then dogmatically seeks maintenance of the “Status Quo”,

Capitalism suffers no such delusions.
Posted by Col Rouge, Saturday, 16 January 2010 11:41:25 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
DISCLAIMER, i am no fan of the liberal/national coalition but at least they are not as completely, totally and utterly corrupt as the labour/green coalition.

Mark Latham was quite correct. The labour party is beyond any hope of rejuvenation. There are many out there who would say that there is nothing lower than a paedophile, but, there is. They are the politicians, bureaucrats & journalists, who protect them. Anybody foolish enough to believe there is anything good about the labour/green coalition should try googling "heineraffair.info".

The Fitzgerald inquiry barely scratched the surface of corruption in QLD. It was shut down just as it got to the really interesting stuff in local government, with barely a word from anybody in the labour/green coalition or the media. The Goss labour government changed corruption from cash in brown paper bags to "corporate dinners with the minister", in other words they just made it more sophisticated & modern.

The socialist left in all states & territories has been at the forefront of every attack on the family, promoting social unrest, dysfunctionality, dependence on welfare & drugs, so as to promote there new growth industries of DV & "social talk". There is no such thing as a "social worker". My children along with millions of others over the last 3 or 4 decades were abused by official government policies, executed in a cold, evil, deliberate manner by successive, labour/green coalition governments federally & in all states & territories. Then these criminal thugs, dare to apologise about past abuse, that occurred over 40 years ago in order to spin doctor or cover up what they have been doing since then.

At future elections number the greens last, labour second last, liberals third last, nationals fourth last, & put every minor party from "Australia First" to "Family First" to "Fred Nile's Christian Democrats" or even the DLP & every whack job independent ahead of the major parties. Your vote can never be wasted as we have preferential voting & maybe then the major parties will realise how sick we are of them all.
Posted by Formersnag, Saturday, 16 January 2010 12:04:15 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The Age Comrade Giles stated that, "'I'm really pleased to report ... that no specific allegations of branch stacking were brought before the committee,' Andrew Giles, one of the members on the committee investigating the allegations, told the conference".

A pseudo-reply for "yes we know but we won't do anything about it".

I am becoming a fence sitting libertarian, I can't see myself as anything else.

Good article from The Age.
Posted by RaeBee, Saturday, 16 January 2010 5:25:00 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
And just what is a socialist, sturmbahn fuehrer Beljac? Is it being a communist or believing that a safety net is a good thing or somewhere in between?

Seeing that
- state labour parties are privatising more utilities than Maggie Thatcher,
- there were no howls of outrage when China legalised private ownership of property a few years ago and
- the ABC doesn't open news bulletins to the cheery tune of the International (though the Howardites will claim you can clearly hear the slogan "Marxism rules, Capitalism sucks" when it is played backwards)

I suspect that most Australian socialists just feel that a safety net, public services like schools and hospitals are a good thing. To paint every socialist as a communist is just plain ludicrous.

Yes branch stacking is a bad thing but lets not stray off topic with wild accusations.

If we want to have a real democracy we should have proportional representation in both houses. We'd end up with more than two major parties which means a lot more coalitions and compromise. Once we get to the point where this term's opposition party is next term's coalition party politics will get a lot more mature. Not just opposing every idea for the mere sake of being the opposition party. No more endless slagging and name calling. It would be a big step closer to a real democracy. Sadly I don't think our politicians are up for it.
Posted by gusi, Saturday, 16 January 2010 6:45:24 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Just a comment on Col Rogue's statement re: Pinochet versus Stalin...

If you want to take the sheer scale of slaughter - then again - take the slaughter of leftists in Indonesia (500,000), genocide in Guatemala (300,000), the Vietnam War (6 million killed), or WWI (more than 15 million killed)...

I could go on - but the point is that allegedly liberal and democratic regimes can be as murderous as allegedly socialist or communist regimes.

Furthermore - I am more sympathetic to the kind of socialism/social democracy we've seen in places like Sweden, Denmark, Holland... Although I belive also in a more radical implementation of economic democracy and participatory democracy than we've seen there...

At the end of the day, though: only when ordianry people truly seize power - hopefully in a liberal, democratic and social democratic context - will they be able to prevent the wars and the slaughter rationalised by those with power - often for cyncial geo-political reasons...
Posted by Tristan Ewins, Sunday, 17 January 2010 9:17:12 AM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Tristan,

While there are atrocities that can be attributed to non socialist governments, nothing can compare to the 10s of millions of citizens killed by their own governments by Stalin, Lenin, and to a lesser extent by those following in the soviet union, and further millions killed by Mao in the cultural reform.

Socialism's trademark is that it takes equality to the point of enforced conformity. Liberty is all about choice, and while much of it may not seem fair, it is the engine that drives innovation.

The labor/unionist left is moribund in the ideology of socialism that crippled many OECD countries in the 60s and 70s and did a fair amount of damage to the Aus economy.

The labor left should leave to join its ideological cousins in the Greens, however, with the union affiliation of the labor party, it enjoys far more influence there. While not in control it inflicts an unhealthy influence on a party that has tried to remake itself in a more modern fiscally capable centrist mold.

With the palpable split in the labor party, it would be healthier to split the labor party into say New Labor and the Reds party. (sic)
Posted by Shadow Minister, Sunday, 17 January 2010 9:25:22 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
There has been overall moral degeneration of the Labor Left just as there has been within the greater political arena. Historically Labor has always had a more chequered history when it comes to internal fragmentation via the factions and branch stacking.

Many in the Left have thrown up their hands in defeat or succumbed to party pressures, and pressures inherent in the corporatisation of global politics.

The only way to reduce the 'power corrupts absolutely' threat is to ensure mechanisms are in place to transfer elements of power to the people on those issues deemed essential in a democracy.

One of the side effects of the shift towards a corporate society and Right Wing thinking is the confusion and suspicion surrounding socialism. There are many who deliberately or unknowingly confuse the principles of democratic socialism with the worst of fascist or communist regimes.

If you read Latham's books, he really embodied for the most part, the spirit of the old Labor movement's emphasis on egalitarianism, social justice and access to opportunity and services. Where is this universal resolve now in the ALP - just another corporate cog in the capitalist wheel.

This is not to overlook the efforts the current government has made in some areas such as homelessness, but the ALP has forgotten the big picture. For all Latham's faults he would have been preferable to the current PM. I liken Latham to more real and open politicians such as Barnaby Joyce, Bernardi, Xenophon, Brown etal, while you may not like their politics, at least you are seeing and dealing with a real person.

Who was it that said recently that Mr Rudd should concentrate more on being an ex-bureaucrat who happened to become a leader rather than a leader who still behaves like a good bureacrat.

People no longer expect their politicians be honest yet we should insist upon it. Transparency is lip service and spin is up. It is up to us to vote the offenders out - there are some good Independents and Greens - we continue to let them get away with it.
Posted by pelican, Sunday, 17 January 2010 9:40:36 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
To gusi, it seems many people believe socialism = communism. I believe the idea comes from American capitalists who cannot or do not want to comprehend democratic socialism. The idea of looking after those in their society less able to do so is tantamount to a breach of their constitutional rights.

Anyway it is an old arguement just rearing it's head again. I am still heading down the road of being a fence sitting liberal. There is hardly any difference between the two parties regardless, but I just can't bring myself to vote labour again.
Posted by RaeBee, Sunday, 17 January 2010 1:02:57 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
To Tristan just because countries call themselves something doesn't mean that they are:
east germany - democratic republic of Germany
North Korea - democratic republic of Korea
PRC - run by the communist party (Marx would turn in his grave)
Democratic Republic of Congo etc etc etc...
Similarly some states with a democratic system actually never change ruling parties; Singapore and until recently Japan spring to mind.

I think we need to be very careful before we start applying generalist labels. Politicians love these because they are empty and people apply their own interpretation to them. That applies to both sides of the fence; there is a vast gulf between a Howard-liberal and a small-l liberal for instance.

In my book a socialist is someone who wants a state with a safety net and a fair go for everyone. Americans may settle for "Liberty or Death", but many of of us from the continent prefer "Liberty, Equality, Fraternity". I suspect that most Australians fit in between somewhere.
Posted by gusi, Sunday, 17 January 2010 3:20:13 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Col's up to his usual old tricks I see, feigning moral high ground for effect, by means of sophistry, straw man and recursive arguments etc.
None of which hold any intellectual/factual basis.
I still await his definitive examples or proof that despite the titles most so called socialist govts aren't really.
___________________________________________

SM,

You are correct as far as you go but one swallow still doesn't mean ipso facto spring. Likewise one or two attributes don't mean socialism, any more that a vote means democracy.
names,claims mean/prove nothing.

I repeat *I favour equity (fairness) not necessarily equality*. The latter is solely theoretical, aspirational and only exists with inanimate object.

I would argue that 'capitalism' as practiced today isn't that. In fact it is an amalgam of several other lesser realities (i.e. human greed/nature). It's so corrupted by externalities as to render the the description as a farce, it should have a different name.

Sure our economics system has elements of capitalism but the theory neither predict or definitively explain the reality. The current invocation is predicated on the magic pudding scenario. And notional concepts of wealth, money, worth value etc.
It *isn't* a science. It fails several of the scientific tests.
Posted by examinator, Monday, 18 January 2010 1:29:46 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Also, the entire Left is quietly going along with Rudd's personal ambitions to re-Christianise our public schools, a continuation of Howardism. It won't be long before they start selling public schools off to 'faiths' to run them as private 'religious' schools.
Posted by The Blue Cross, Monday, 18 January 2010 1:51:51 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
This story is about 20 years too late.

The ALP, since 1983, have been in neoliberal mode.

In Qld this was driven hardest by Comrade Rudd, the Christian -socialist we had to have, in his role under Goss, the hard right man who did save us from Joh's crew, but what a price we all paid.

Best just to stop voting ALP altogether, and swing to the Greens instead, they'll never get in so it's quite safe.

As for this line: "A democracy movement employing alternative forms of political action is now necessary..."

A fine thought, but most decent people left the ALP during the Hawke-Keating years, or those wasted head-nodding years of agreement and appeasement under Beastly.

Anyone left still in the ALP under Rudd must be suspected as being in-it-for-the-money only, since there is so little difference between Rudd and Howard.

As for Tanner, he's always been a sham.

People forget that he worked for the Federated Clerks Union, and was employed during it's NCC days, so he must have hidden his 'socialism' very well when applying for his job.

To differentiate himself from the NCC leadership he swayed to the Left, and organised the 'reform group' of FCU branches in Victoria, Qld and Sth Oz.

The reality was that the FCU continued as a badly run union, organised along 'small business' lines as a fascist dictatorship, or as a Stalinist crew maybe.

Kim Carr and Jenny Macklin would have to be the sorriest of all ex-Left people.

Carr supporting a clapped-out car industry and Macklin wholeheartedly supporting Howardism for the Indigenous mobs.

Mind you, the oaf Ferguson seems happy promoting nuclear proliferation as hard as he gets told to by the industry.
Posted by The Blue Cross, Monday, 18 January 2010 1:57:50 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
There's merit to some of the arguments here - but I reject the idea that all people on the Left of good conscience have left the ALP.

'Voting with your feet' in protest does not good unless when you 'move on' you re-organise - and in such a way as to gain more leverage than you had when in the ALP.

For my own part - the main form my activism takes is through my blog 'Left Focus' - and writing for On Line Opinion. Leaving would give me no additional leverage...

But yes - the disillusioned legions of those in the ALP Left - and others including non-aligned members - who have any serious in-principle commitment to meaningful social democracy - need to organise in response...

With leadership and organisation I believe it is still possible to make a difference - within AND outside of the ALP...

But leading figures - including in the ALP Left - prefer complete control - to make deals as powerbrokers - rather than to genuiniely empower the rank and file...

Again - to conclude though - this kind of critique can demoralise Left activists - and unless these people have some other kind of vehicle to organise and make a difference - then convincing these people to quit achieves nothing...
Posted by Tristan Ewins, Monday, 18 January 2010 4:04:47 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Tristan
You make some valid points. It was a sad day when the Australian Democrats left the political scene. They filled the gap for a while in their heyday at least.

There is room for a party of similar ilk - perhaps the Australia Social Democrats - or similar.

There are two ways for reform, either from within the ALP or from without. Running away and regrouping is not necessarily a negative if it means that voters are given more choice at the polls and a REAL choice for social democracy.

Concepts of Party loyalty and party politics are anathema to real democracy.

Crikey revealed recently that Rudd staffers may be in line for pre-selection for Labor seats. No rank and file democracy there and while this is not new, it goes completely against what Labor stands for (IMO).

http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/10/06/tips-and-rumours-109/

How long do you stay to resuscitate?
Posted by pelican, Monday, 18 January 2010 7:15:40 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Interesting discussion, but ignoring the elephant in the room, which is the rise of the feminist dominated middle-class unions, such as the PS unions and the nurses and teachers. They have taken over the rhetoric of the left and directed it specifically and exclusively toward women, thereby coopting a whole group of people who are not naturally inclined to the left, but are happy to take the handouts and preferential treatment.

There is no longer room within the party for a generally leftist approach, since to offer any kind of assistance to those economically disadvantaged men who need it will be met with howls of "discrimination" and "sexism" and "misogyny" from the middle-class spongers.

"Some animals are more equal than others".
Posted by Antiseptic, Tuesday, 19 January 2010 5:36:50 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Anti
Just to make you feel better I can absolutely asure you that the ALP is not dominated by female power brokers, nor are the Libs for that matter.

The PS unions are not dominated by women. The National Executive of the CPSU is three women and four men. Pretty even really. The mix among other unions bodies still finds the men ahead.

I wonder if one day we will ever see an honest post from you acknowledging some aspect of life in which women draw the short straw. I am sure even you can find one.
Posted by pelican, Tuesday, 19 January 2010 1:26:15 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Pelican, whoever rises to a power position within the PS unions has to declare their unequivocal support for feminist ideological positions: it's de rigeur.

Rudd was at least honest enough in his press release today http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,26605242-953,00.html
to acknowledge the real reason for his support of female workfarce engagement, which is that in a nation with an aging population, GDP depends on finding new workers. I've previously mentioned this myself, as a valid reason for encouraging female workforce participation. Where he and I part company is in his support for female preferment in all sorts of other aspects of society, but then, I don't have his background in the public service, nor his vast reliance on female support both within and outside the party.

The ALP, like the LIBNATS, is acutely aware of the "women's vote". This gives those who claim to be feminist a great deal of power, even if the mechanisms are obfuscated due to older power dynamics.

I refute your claim that I lack empathy for the plight of disadvantaged women. What I lack is sympathy for the whining bleatings of overprivileged middle-class "princesses" who expect the State to remove even the most completely crushed peas from beneath their pile of feather beds.
Posted by Antiseptic, Tuesday, 19 January 2010 2:29:41 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Getting into a discussion about women in politics is pointless on this thread. It's happening all over the world so whether some males feel threatened by that, that's their problem. The facts are, women have to work now, most full time and if they are expected to be fully employed in the modern work place then some will be in politics and will be union officials. They are educated people.

Women can't just be told work but don't expect to take up positions of power. Julia Gillard is about the only women in the Federal Labour Government that I have any time for at all. The poe-faced Penny Wong is a Rudd puppet. So what? She knows her place and is happy being there.

Fact is, back when labour was truly socialist the party did do some really great things whether some agree or not; public housing for instance. Some Australians would never have been home owners had it not been for the introduction of public housing the people were able to buy eventually. Better working hours and conditions in the workplace, now being eroded by BOTH parties.

Some people cannot abide Paul Keating but I always thought he was one of our great politicians not to mention treasurers, looking at those past and present. Politicians just conform to party lines now and keep putting out the rhetoric.

A new party would be something would it not? I wonder if Keating could be encouraged to come out of retirement. He is none too happy with KRudd and Company. The bottom line is, I will not vote labour either state or federal at either the state or federal elections.
Posted by RaeBee, Tuesday, 19 January 2010 5:09:20 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
How nice of Kevin to pass blame to the aging population and elderly today. Nice Australia Day message Kev, young people have no respect now the aged and aging, now they are being told they should work harder than ever, as if they are not working as hard as they can now, but no, work harder to sustain the aging population.

Again, many thanks KRudd and a Happy Australia Day to you too.

It wouldn't be your back room decisions on an ETS that might, just might, be the reason for this buck pass.

And if that's not the message our Prime Minister wanted to put out for Australia Day, well think again, because that's how it's come across.
Posted by RaeBee, Tuesday, 19 January 2010 5:19:28 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
RaeBee:"Women can't just be told work but don't expect to take up positions of power."

I don't dispute that for a second. If a woman is able to rise on the basis of her achievements, good for her. If she rises on the basis of her gender I've nothing but contempt for her and the process that puts her there. Think of Anna Bligh as a supreme example of a minimally capable woman who has risen far beyond her ability thanks solely to her playing of gender politics. Karen Struthers is one of her female buddies that keeps getting promoted despite no evidence of any competence at all. Lynn Kosky, who resigned yesteday in Victoria, is another. Kristine Keneaaly in NSW couldn't run the planning ministry competently, but she's been made Premier, mostly to try to entice some women to vote for the terminally on-the-nose NSW ALP. Ability to do the job was never part of the selection criteria. Does anyone think that Julie Bishop is really the best person to be deputy to Tony Abbott? Hardly, but she is female and they need the "women's vote", so she keeps getting put up as deputy, despite her obvious lack of talent for anything other than selecting nice dresses.

Julia Gillard, although her gender was critical in her rise, is at least a very competent person and would no doubt have risen regardless. OTOH, Tanya Plibersek, Kate Ellis, Jenny Macklin are all chronic underachievers who've based their career on their gender. Wong managed the triple bonus of being female, lesbian and Asian - she HAD to get a Ministry, regardless of her capacity.

Please note, there are incompetent male ministers too, but they didn't get the job based on their gender.

RaeBee:"How nice of Kevin to pass blame to the aging population and elderly today"

I can recall the famous demographic plots from school during the 70s. What is new is that the PM is actually being honestly pragmatic in acknowledging the real reason for his support of feminism.
Posted by Antiseptic, Wednesday, 20 January 2010 7:12:18 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Anti
Trouble is if you champion the cause of disadvantaged women and they start realising their goals, they, by your definition, become just another middle class princess. Most women are middle class, not all of them with a sense of entitlement based solely on gender.

You mention Anna Bligh but you don't mention the numerous male politicians who rose to the top purely by the grace of the boys club and their position in party politics with little or no talent. If you know anything at all about Labor, you would know that women have to fight every step of the way to get through the very male dominated party machine. This is just the reality. So some of the women may not prove to be worthy by our standards, but are the men any better? Women and men face the same party pressures to conform unfortunately, and not many survive independent thought or public declarations that conflict with the party line.

RaeBee
Yes I agree, the ageing population rhetoric must be the biggest furphy ever laid on the electorate. Just watch it being used as the excuse for an increase in taxes. It was poor planning and inappropriate allocation of resources that created the problem and emphasis on growing the population will only result in a repeat of the situation later on. We are destined to repeat the mistakes of the past so it would seem.
Posted by pelican, Wednesday, 20 January 2010 7:58:45 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The Blue Cross,

Lindsay Tanner was not simply an “employee” of the FCU. He did not “apply” for a job with it. He won an election for the assistant state secretary’s position in opposition to the then leadership group. He then used it to win the following election for his team. I say this simply to correct the record. I am no fan of Lindsay Tanner because he treated my friends who were actually employees of the FCU appallingly. In the end, the FCU just disappeared, a sad end to a great anti-communist union.

I am a fan of Jenny Macklin. She is a very decent person, and she is doing a good job under very difficult circumstances in continuing the intervention in the NT.

Antiseptic,

Lynne Kosky was, in fact, a very competent minister. She inherited the mess in transport. Prior to that, she played a significant role in rebuilding the education system of Victoria after the dreadful 1992-99 period.
Posted by Chris C, Wednesday, 20 January 2010 10:12:03 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
"Wong managed the triple bonus of being female, lesbian and Asian - she HAD to get a Ministry, regardless of her capacity".

It is very easy to sit online and anonymously fire off cow-pats at public individuals from a safe distance. The reality is though, whatever people think of Penny Wong's position on issues (myself included), it is clear that she is no political light weight and is there by virtue of her brains and toughness, and that is what needed in politics.

Antiseptic on the other hand is no-where except on OOL firing of anti-feminist and anti-women barbs and those missives miss rather pathetically more often than not. Glad that it's Penny in the job rather than him.
Posted by JL Deland, Wednesday, 20 January 2010 6:40:31 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Pelican:"Trouble is if you champion the cause of disadvantaged women and they start realising their goals, they, by your definition, become just another middle class princess."

And if they do, they no longer need support because they're no longer disadvantaged. Simple, isn't it? Do you genuinely think that middle-class people require government support? If they do, we've fallen a long, long way since I was a child.

Your characterisation of Labor politics as a patriarchal machine is quite wrong in today's world, when affirmative action policies mean that a minimally-qualified woman will gain pre-selection over better-qualified men. Add to that the dominance of women in the white-collar unions (for similar and related reasons) and you have a very different picture to the one you're trying to paint.

Chris C, it seems you largely agrree with my list of time-servers. I'm prepared to accept your view of Kosky's talents in the absence of sufficient interest to follow it up. I don't agree about Macklin: she's done virtually nothing in her role as Minister and she wasn't up to much as a Shadow.

JLDeland:"It is very easy to sit online and anonymously fire off cow-pats at public individuals from a safe distance."

Not as easy as getting a "job for the girls" within the Labor Party...
Posted by Antiseptic, Thursday, 21 January 2010 7:29:32 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Anti
I wasn't arguing for more middle class welfare - we don't need it or should aspire to it IMO. Please quote where I have stated such.

I was arguing that by your definition any women who achieves any level of success in the workforce is a middle class princess. It seems women can't win. They either wallow in the disadvantaged end or be ridiculed and derided in the middle classes and above.

Your experience of Labor is very different to mine and I have worked for Labor although never an ALP member. Most of safe vacant seats have been given to Labor men like Combet, Shorten, and now it looks as if two Federal Canberra seats may become vacant. It is only men that look to be in the running for those so far.

You are kidding yourself if you think the previous positive discrimination for women in some sectors is any different than the safe position of the boys club for some quite untalented men.

Lets just encourage the talented and those who achieve success on their own merits rather than get too bogged down in gender. A one-sided bias on gender politics is not going to help the Labor Left one iota.
Posted by pelican, Thursday, 21 January 2010 6:53:47 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Pelican:"I wasn't arguing for more middle class welfare - we don't need it or should aspire to it IMO"

Ah, I see, so you're actually in agreement with my point then. I must have been confused by the fact you were arguing with me about it...

Pelican:"by your definition any women who achieves any level of success in the workforce is a middle class princess"

Rubbish. That's your straw m...woman. My concern is that there has been massive social upheaval that does little for the disadvantaged women you mention, but whose plight is used to justify ever greater featherbedding for middle-class women who don't need it.

My business premises used to be in a small industrial estate that included several small factories manufacturing such items as sports uniforms, food products and similar process-type operations. The staff in each case were mostly women and mostly of PI origin and they worked their bums off on casual wages, often being sent home with little notice because a delivery had failed to arrive or something.

I'd be willing to bet that you, as a middle class Government employee on a good wage, received just as much in the way of Government handouts as they did - possibly more, since you're more aware of your entitlements, I suspect.

M ex-wife, with 4 uni degrees and working on a fifth while she takes home her $75k public service wage lives in a Qld Housing Commission house. She recently asked me to sign a document in relation to the child custody arrangements for Centrelink because she had discovered she was "missing out" on some payment or other worth $25 a week.

To date, the Government has subsidised her education to the tune of over $100k, which she repays at the peppercorn rate demanded by HECS.

Would you like to guess how much I claim in govt handouts? Here's a clue: you couldn't buy a pot of beer with it.
Posted by Antiseptic, Friday, 22 January 2010 6:57:54 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Well that explains why you think the way you do. Probably no point in engaging at all but one last try.

You make a few assumptions about government handouts. Do you really assume that middle class women only receive government handouts. Where are they - so far I don't qualify for any.

The only time we have ever claimed a government handout was the Parenting Allowance some years ago while living on one income - definitely not living the middle class life at that stage, having both decided to raise our kids at home for the most part.

We have also paid a heap in taxes. I am only a part-time government employee earning a fair wage but not excessive and have actually downshifted both financially and in status. It helps not to be materialistic.

There is so little value in materialism, yet I would have to say my husband and I are both middle class. I would not label him a prince at all (I assume you think middle class men are princes too in the interests of fairness). He has always worked hard and been a good dad.

You never have a good word to say about women unless they remain disadvantaged it seems.
Posted by pelican, Friday, 22 January 2010 9:48:38 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Antiseptic,

I don’t ‘largely agree with [your] list of time-servers’. I just commented on two you mentioned about whom I have a firm opinion.
Posted by Chris C, Saturday, 23 January 2010 3:59:03 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Pelican:"Do you really assume that middle class women only receive government handouts"

Of course not, when have I ever claimed that? OTOH, middle class women do receive such handouts and they have no justifiable claim, it seems to me.

By all means give the disadvantaged a hand up, but once they're on their feet, let them stand on their own. at present, that is the situation for men and to a lesser extent married women, but for any single woman with kids there is a bonanza of handouts available, many of which are only means-tested at extremely high levels.

Does my ex-wife genuinely require the Government to subsidise her rent through the Housing Commission? She can continue to have them do so even if she earns up to $90k. She's just demanded they increase the height of the fence because she has decided she wants a dog. Is she really incapable of paying for that herself?

No doubt several of the process workers I mentioned earlier would quite like a nice cheap Housing Commission place, instead of the squalid, insecure private rentals available on their budget.

The world of Feminist activism is littered with such single mothers, from Eva Cox to Elspeth McInnes and all the rest of the panoply. each and every one has continued to drain the public purse even after any genuine need existed and as they have risen within bureaucracy, academia and politics (all of which have had "affirmative action" policies for years) they have agitated for more and more fetherbedding for themselves and those like them, all the while claiming to be "victims".

It's nothing more than sponging.

Chris C:"I don’t ‘largely agree"

Perhaps you might point out why. Bald statements don't make for good conversations.
You say I never have a good word to say about women. that's not even remotely true. I admire women who work hard and don't expect to be treated as princesses merely for their possession of a vagina. Sadly, in today's world, that sort of woman is pretty thin on the ground.
Posted by Antiseptic, Sunday, 24 January 2010 8:30:21 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Antiseptic,

I am not trying to convince you of anything in regard to the MPs I did not mention. I am just correcting your assumption that my not commenting on them means I agree with you. I thought you were being unfair to Lynne Kosky and Jenny Macklin, so I commented. I do not know how able Tanya Plibersek, Kristine Kenneally and Kate Ellis are. I think Anna Bligh is able, but I have no motivation to convince you of that view. I agree that Julia Gillard is able and that Julie Bishop is a poor deputy to Tony Abbott. I don’t know who Karen Struthers is.

I have never said that you “never have a good word to say about women”. You must be confusing me with someone else.
Posted by Chris C, Sunday, 24 January 2010 8:44:39 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
ChrisC, my apologies, the final comment was actually meant to go above my reply to you; it was addressed to Pelican. sorry for the confusion.

Thanks also for your reply. I post to stimulate responses and I always hope that someone will disagree, since from such "conflict" comes much to think on. It's the scientific "hypothesise and test" method applied to discussion, at the risk of sounding pompous.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kate_Ellis

I'll leave you to draw your own conclusions about her capacity and how much of her career she owes to her gender.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tanya_Plibersek

Ditto.

TBH, I may have been a little harsh on Keneally. she's green and she got the job because of her gender, but she may yet be competent. The debacle she made of Planning was largely created by Sartor, her predecessor.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anna_Bligh
Bligh is a very able practitioner of Feminist politics. As a Premier, she'd make a good streetsweeper.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karen_Struthers
Wikipaedia doesn't know anything about her either.

http://www.queenslandlabor.org/01_cms/details.asp?ID=403
Here's her ALP page. Once again, draw your own conclusions. I'll just add that as Minister for Office of Women, she was severely castigated last year by the Estimates committee because out of an office budget of nearly $4 million she spent more than $3.3million on administrative overhead. Her response: "I suppose we could have done a bit better". She was given Community Services and Housing only a couple of months later... I guess being a grrrlfriend of nAnna's helps.
There were questions raised recently about why some Government schools funds were diverted to her electorate at the expense of poorer schools in other seats.
Posted by Antiseptic, Sunday, 24 January 2010 9:30:46 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Antispectic
Do you you believe there are any untalented men among Labor or are they alright by you by virtue of being male?

The problem is, and if you cannot see it there seems little hope, that you are very quick to pick up any faults no matter how small with some of the women in politics but what about the bevy of untalented men who made it by virtue of the safety net of the boys club and political positioning? Why do none of these rate a mention?

That is perhaps the real elephant in the room.
Posted by pelican, Sunday, 24 January 2010 3:53:37 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy