Radio Australia this morning saw this man an enigma for me interviewed on his life storys impending release.
I was there, much younger more militant and still feel that day 11/11 1975.
Still remember the indignity of this nations Governor general appearing to be very warnout and emotional[drunk] in public.
The Lord of Nareen has been very different men in his life ultra conservative.
Those wet checks as he cried on the election night in 1983 got me screaming in joy.
His lost trousers? giggling like a school girl.
But today I admire the man.
Yes true I in fact intend ASAP to read every word of it, some will be painful some make me angry.
At times I will have to confront facts the me of 1975 would never think of.
We bought it on our selves, it was wrong to stop money in the senate, to make my fathers home town Bowral a fortress, to divide this country for a time.
And yes Robert Hawk governed much better , did more for this country than the government that helped Fraser and a rampart biased press destroy it self partly by actions of some who knew no better
Big Mal? a man who has the respect of both sides of the house yet once did not.
Those who conclude Abbott is leading in t5he right direction should consider this mans words.

Mal mellowed as he aged, but what convinces you he would act differently if he held the reins of power again? At best he would be a paternalist conservative.

I believe that much of his criticism of the Liberal Party for not sticking to the fundamentals of 'liberalism' was not-so-veiled sledging and pay-back directed at his long-remembered enemies in the party. I would criticise him for bearing grudges against Howard and others.

Was the Liberal Party ever liberal? I don't think so, Menzies chose the label as a convenient cloak and for marketing.

Australia does need a party founded on liberal democratic principles, but it would be most unattractive to the financial supporters of the 'Liberal' Party for whom 'liberalism' is applied exclusively in an economic sense and means no guvvy regulation or taxes for them (ie I'm all right Jack).

Dear Belly,

It will be interesting to read Malcolm Fraser's
co-authored memoirs. I wonder how his version of
the 1975 events will go?

He lived through every moment of it - and I
wonder what he will have to say in retrospect,
especially now that he's approaching 80.

Much has changed since those times - especially
within the Party that he joined so many years ago
under Menzies. My personal feelings are that John
Howard did a tremendous amount of damage to the
Party. The Party - under his authoritarian control
became a much meaner machine.

As Fraser points out:

"The departures from the principles underlying that
Liberal Party (as founded by Menzies) are substantial
and serious. The Party has become a Party of fear and
reaction...it has not led in positive directions.
It has allowed and some would say promoted race and
religion to be part of today's agenda. I find it
unrecognisable ..."

Fraser has indeed mellowed - however that's due not
only to age - but his experiences with Human Rights
Organisations - and his global experiences - his
outlook has broadened. Were he to return to power today,
he would definitely be a different man, and certainly
different from the narrow, limited views of the current
Opposition Leader and his frontbench.

Perhaps they ought to read Fraser's Biography - they may
actually learn something. Tony Abbott certainly could do
better than to keep on following
his mentor's (Howard's) old policies in 2010.

Malcolm will always be to me a bigoted, paternalistic and ruthless scumbag who merely went senile and started to get a (Rather selective) heart bleed- more a man nearing his twilight years trying to clear his conscience to wriggle out of the afterlife he might felt he was fast heading towards- and somehow still failing to really redeem himself.

He seems to show little remorse for his role as Minister of Defense in the invasion of Vietnam, the introduction of Conscription or his vengeful social policies; still frequently shows his scorn and condescention for the views and democratic rights of the public (including his stance on the Republic), and to top it off, is INCREDIBLY gluttonous with his taxpayer-funded retirement benefits.

Needless to say, I will not be giving him any more of my money he is currently leeching off me.

Let me know if there are any Ted Mack autobiographies- not only is he an actually decent bloke, but his take on politics would, I imagine, be very interesting indeed!

I have often wondered how labor can choose such dreadful leaders. Then when I think of some of the liberal leaders, I realise labor don't have an exclusive on that trick.

Fraser, to my mind was a blood brother to Turmbull. Both so arrogant that they thought they knew it all, & too lazy, with that arrogance, to do the research to find the facts.

Although they probably have high IQ, this characteristics make them as stupid as any dill. Come to think of it, the libs must have been coaching labour on how to chose this type of leader.

Fraser had the opportunity do do some real good, & fluffed it, achieving nothing worthwhile. Fortunately, Turnbull was shown the door, before he had any chance to damage anything but the party. A lucky escape for us.

Any book by this sour old goat, with approaching senility, will be just an attempt at justification, of his time as PM.

I wonder, as a rich man who was born with a platinum spoon in his mouth and having enjoyed a privileged life thereafter, whether Mal has ever thought of donating his parliamentary pension to a good cause like a home for boys who were not as lucky as he.

What a wonderful gesture it would be to set up a fund for young boys who could live for a few months in the shearers' sheds on Nareen and help run the property, watched over by mentors with suitable skills and background.

Mal would get a lot out of it personally. In a way it would make up for the emotionally impoverished life some say Mal had as a child.

Dreams.

Isnt it interesting how all these "leaders" become all wet and full of concern once they retire. Pity they couldnt exercise their humanity while they still had the power to make a difference.

Dear Cornflower,

The Frasers sold their 3603ha Western District Property -
Nareen in 1998.

They now live on the Mornington Peninsula in Victoria.

It might be actually worth a read of Malcolm Fraser's
memoirs - because the man has a wide and varied
history of philanthropy - that he preferred to remain
private. The same goes for his wife - who to this day
is a volunteer with the Red Cross and The Stroke
Foundation.

Anyway, the following website might be of some interest:

http://www.racismnoway.com.au/classroom/factsheets/46.html

Foxy you, as usual are spot on.
It is clear the wounds for some are very much still there.
On both sides
Just as clear bitterness blinds some.
His words about the Asian war yesterday gave me insight into his reasons for those acts in truth at that early time most thought that way.
I still love our leader from those days,even when he tells us just how good he was.
Still feel the unfairness of press and media playing un fair.
But I have the opportunity to look back with honesty.
We put the wrong people in the wrong jobs, some thought we had 23 years in power , they alone let their party down.
Bob governed much better, it is shallow and baseless to ignore the post Parliament achievements of Fraser.
History reminds me today of just how lies fear and manufactured press storys can help one side of politics harm another.
In truth that day in November , a historic day for bad deeds done, was coming without the need for such action.
The ALP made its own date with destiny and grew into todays good government.
Abbott is not unlike some I blame for that day, on my side of the house, pulling his party down, so it too can be rebuilt, he will not be judged well for it .

Bob Menzies was even worse.
Remember that he was the PRIME Minister when he decided that people should be conscripted to invade Vietnam, with a selection process by a LOTTERY.

This was unlike ANYTHING before or since- in the World Wars conscription was put to referendum- and rejected- with the result accepted.

John Howard, for all his faults, at least NEVER introduced it.

It's actually quite bizarre that the 'idols' of Australian liberalism were by far the most fascist politicians we've had since the convict days.

Dear King Hazza,

Sociology has a central lesson, it is that
societies, together with all the social
institutions and social behaviour they contain,
are continuously created and re-created by the
acts of coutless individuals whether these
individuals realize their role in the grand sweep
of history or not.

You brought up the Vietnam War.

If a modern society goes to war, it isn't
just because the leaders have opted for war,
but because the people have implicitly or
explicitly done so also - or at least,
they have not opted for peace.

The Vietnam war came to an end largely
as a result of the antiwar movement, a
social movement that consisted disproportionately
of young people, including many college students.
When the antiwar movement first challenged the war,
it received little support from politicians or
the press, and its goals seemed almost hopeless.
But the tide of public opinion gradually began to
shift.

In the USA, in the 1968 presidential primaries, an antiwar
candidate backed by student volunteers did unexpectedly
well and President Johnson decided not to run for re-election.
From that point on, political debate on the war focused
not on how to stay in it, but on how to get out of it.
Through collective action - ordinary people with few
resources other than their own determination had changed a
national censensus for war to a national consensus for peace.

A fundamental insight of sociology is that once people no
longer take their world for granted, but instead understand
the social authorship of their lives and futures, they can
become an irresistible force in history.

This was also done in the last Federal election when the voters
got rid of the Howard government (including in his own Electorate),
in a landslide.

Foxy I don't think the context was that simple as far as war goes;
As Australians get zero consultation rights when their politicians want to invade another country or join a foreign conflict there is no way to be sure anyone actually initially supported either of the wars (Vietnam or Iraq).

As it stood with the Iraq war, the voters were expected to vote the entire Liberal Party out of office (via their local candidate) and help put a different party in, on the promise that they would pull out- and in doing so risk whatever other policies they had slung along.

As for the biography on that website- I'm not impressed- a tremendous amount of fluff about his life before and after politics, and a gigantic omission of all of his nastier actions during his career.

In short, I'm simply struggling to see what is so 'wonderful' about this man- at all.

King Hazza you could have written that last sentence in another way.
It should have said
I am struggling to see,,,full stop.
I am well into Bob Menzies speech's, he was not my cup of tea, but he very much was for voters, and he was a man of his times.
John Howard worshiped him but left his path and traveled a long way from his aimed directions.
Fraser highlights that both in his interview and the book, co written as foxy says.
Balance in all things, no party ever gets it alright.
Most do however learn from mistakes.
I understand what made Fraser and Menzies tick.
Understand Howard's reasons but never his spite directed at workers via his anti union stand.
As a younger more radical man in 1975, I was one of a few hundred who became known as S.A.C.K. society to assert the constitution over Kerr.
We even bought fine wines and liqueurs had them delivered to his home.
Yet I today can not think of him or Howard as some one I would talk to but Fraser and Menzies?
Even if Bob [Ming] did crawl to HM and want to call our dollar the royal, yep interesting conversations interest me.
My 5 cents less than $60 has not been spent yet but todays bit from the book about Mal and John Grey Gorton looks good.

Dear King Hazza,

I was merely trying to point out that
collective action on the part of voters
does get results.

However, if you're "struggling," to find
out more about Malcolm Fraser - read his
memoirs. And also the website that I've
given on this thread.

As I wrote on another thread - constructive
debating is an art - and its always a good
idea to check more than one source - be
informed on the issues and get acquainted with
alternative point of view.

Stay open to learning.

I will not be buying the Fraser book. I loathe the man. I could clearly see what damage the Whitlam government was doing to my country and I spent a lot of time, effort and money to get Fraser elected, and guess what, nothing changed. Even worse, he implemented the multiculturalism, that Grassby started, and allowed 30,000 or so of the Lebs in, which impacted so much on our culture.

He has got sillier and more senile with age.
No I wont buy, or read, his bloody book. I already know more than enough about him.

Just to forget him feels good.

I've read plenty of his own recent opinions and am not impressed with him- still holding a bigoted, elitist and rather contemptuous tone, and an appallingly superficial and indifferent attitude towards politics- especially as far as his attitudes towards the public goes (and a few occasions condemning free speech if its 'offensive' (which is supposed to be the point of it)).

Maybe I'm listening to too many articles by Ted Mack- who aside from having an actually admirable history in politics and better attitude towards the Australian public, also analyzes the nitty gritty and motivations of corruption in politics and has since fed my distaste for the more self-serving and elitist figures Australians normally give their admiration for a few vague, dreamy words.

As I have said before no politician/party gets it right all the time.
They do not get it wrong all the time as well.
Once I despised the man, in part that was my blindness.
He is no longer that man, his way of talking is a product of his up bringing and education, from another time.
He has evolved during his life, and that can not be over looked.
Maybe his crime for some is being the force that put the ALP on track to be the real force it remains in politics today.
Foxy a determination to remain uninformed is a hard thing to penetrate, I wish you luck but tend to agree with your posts here and else ware on King Hazza.

"Maybe his crime for some is being the force that put the ALP on track to be the real force it remains in politics today."
Ok now I really wish this website allowed smileys- I would have put the 'rolling on floor laughing' one right here.

DO tell what makes the ALP a 'real force' in politics. The only substantial thing about it is that it spends much more money on publicity and thus dominates most airwaves, and gets lots of corporate and lobbyist 'donations' (including from cults like the Brethren) and backroom deals with various companies (and don't forget Family First).
Just like the Liberals in a nutshell.
Beyond that, both parties put as little effort into running the country as they can instead of ride the gravy train, and both seem to stumble over themselves to sell off whatever assets Australia owns (or owned) to certain private companies (which they mysteriously get jobs in after retirement).
If THIS is 'real force' then I merely have another thing to despise about Fraser for increasing the amount of political corruption in Australian politics- if he, indeed, actually made an imprint at all.

Also DO enlighten me what is so nice about Malcolm Fraser:
Merely bleating that people need to be nicer to the people HE is specifically concerned about, and donating a (VERY) small portion of his taxpayer's pension (the HIGHEST of any retired pollie- including even Howard and Keating) to charity- which aside from not really being his money, also begs the question of his substantially gluttonous personal spending with the REST of it- is NOT 'nice'- it's cheap.

So far you are only touching the mere facade both Fraser and the Labor party (and I'd wager, the Liberals) are each putting on.

Dear King Hazza,

I don't have the time to respond to you this morning
in great detail - as I'm about to go to a Meeting -
however, just as a bit of quick information - you
may be surprised to learn that Malcolm Fraser in his
retirement takes the lowest amount from the Government
as a former PM. John Howard takes the highest (in the
millions). That alone is something worth noting - don't
you think?

Anyway, got to run ...

King Hazza I do have the time to respond to you.
But will not full stop.
Many,maybe most who post here are too young to have seen this part of history, well worth a look.
Fraser like any pm has a story and it remains unfinished, he still has time to write other chapters.
My interest in politics is strong, my understanding may not be but it is far in advance of KH.
My youthful war of words with big Mal is long ago, today I see it differently.
yes he did wrong Kerr/Curr too but I understand my party of those days helped unseat themselves.
Interesting reading and like that old tree long gone on a hill outside Picton NSW while I live I grow/learn.

Foxy- actually according to an investigation reported in (I believe the Herald, back in 2006/2007) found that between all of the retired PMs, Mal's retirement expenses were by far the highest, with Keating in second.
Although I could take your word that since then he has toned down- and moreso that Howard would have easily overtaken him.

Belly, you do realise that between the two of us I'm the only person actually bringing up specific details to elaborate my stance, while you just keep insisting I don't 'get it'?
So far, he only has two credible *attempts* to make things better- extending Aboriginal land rights (continuing from Whitlam's work), and SBS. But so far against all his stuff-ups and misdeeds, and some of his less-than-comendable attitudes in various areas, they just don't quite redeem him. His newfound armchair second-person 'compassion' doesn't help at all.

I think I'll leave it at that until some enlightening information listing some good deeds he did for the broad Australian citizenry come to light.

King Hazza your views are your right.
And we will disagree often.
But even I once a foe of the man, can find much more than that in his favor.
While looking back is different than those heated days I remember the rumored reason for him appearing in that hotel lobby without his pants.
He was very active in condemning South Africa at that time.
Rumor had it he may have been set up, he may well have been.
No one could be more unimpressed than me by his manner of speech, but to judge him on that alone.
You throw stones at my ALP and at my views about a past conservative pm.
Can you see the humor in that?
I had intended to ignore your remarks but challenge you to show the same balance my posts have.
It is true, my party started on its journey to the middle of Australian politics under Withlam.
He was remember responsible for taking much power from the left.
He lost control of some in his Cabernet, and we fell on our own swords as a result.
Bob Hawk governed well, with support much like todays for Rudd.
Rudd again has stepped us into what was once Liberal ground.
Like it or lump it Conservatives have lost direction and leadership, along with the next election.
I am far more than happy with both the evolution of Labor and the lost nature of conservatives.

Belly again you have failed to answer any of my questions, provide a redeemingly 'nice' attribute about Malcolm beyond his newfound reduced hostility to the labor party compared to what he used to harbour, nor provide anything remotely as specific as I have in elaborating your case, and I'm afraid I'll just have to leave it at that for now and let all of our previous posts in this topic speak for themselves.

But once again I'll ask, what is 'nice' about Malcolm?

Malcolm's dislike for the Man of Steel resonates with a few.

Dear King Hazza,

The following website clears things up:

http://www.news.com.au/ex-pm-john-howard-costs-taxpayers-more-in-retirement/story-O-1225757105993

It seems that John Howard does indeed cost taxpayers more in
retirement than he did as PM. However, my apologies - Malcolm
Fraser was a big spender - and it was Paul Keating who took
the least.

Anyway, I intend to buy the book - simply because I'm curious
to find out more about 1975 - and the history of events - from
the horse's mouth so to speak. I believe in leaving myself
open to learning - and getting information from all sorts of
sources. I enjoyed Peter Costello's book very much.
And Margaret Whitlam's - just to name a couple.

I don't read books to find out what was "nice" about people -
simply to find out what made them tick - and to capture the
context in which events took place - learning something
about the characters involved in the process.

But to each his own...

Fair enough Foxy;

Although on the side of curiosity and wanting to know the inner workings, I would actually be surprised he would talk about them in much detail (especially anything secretive)- he doesn't seem to touch political corruption very much in any of his previous speeches, and seems to ignore it as an issue quite a bit...

Most of them paint a rather black-and-white world of liberalism/enlightenment vs fascism/communism/regression.

I if I do not spend too much on big boys toys on Sunday get the book on Monday.
A fair amount has been printed in news papers but I do not have any of the cynicism of King Hazza about it, any history that was so important to me then is just as interesting now.