Dear Examinator,

I always enjoy reading your posts.
You're a vessel for a golden heart,
a man of humility, sincerity, honesty
and integrity. You convinced me at the
very beginning that I had something to
say, and fostered in me the courage to
say it - even if you didn't always agree
with what came out.

Dear Severin,

I want to Thank You for having
disagreed with me at times on OLO.
Without intellectual tension there
can be no intellectual development.
Through your contributions to OLO
you've taught me much and improved
me considerably.

I feel that we live in an age of arrogance
and ignorance. Whether this can be cured
will very much depend on people like yourself,
and many others, who contribute to
this Forum.

Foxy we must differ here, in my opinion we live in an age of enlightenment compared with even our recent past.
Grim too, not sure what you think the minority's think but are you too hard on us?
See you have no doubt about your posts but just maybe put mine and others in the harsh basket?
Lets look at today compared with some yesterdays, Australia one hundred years ago would have shot every single boat person, not nice but surely you do not doubt it?
England used India and its people as a cash cow, slaves in fact.
I truly suspect the silent majority do not differ much from my views.
And without reserve am forever and ever opposed to PC, minority's who will not except majority's rule in Democracy's.

Dear Belly,

How much we could achieve if we were capable
of viewing each other in full, nuanced,
human colour. Our humanity does not excuse
our respective wrongdoings, but the fact that
it is unquestionably in common gives us a
frame of reference through which we can
transport ourselves from a world of ignorance
to a world of coherence.

We have to resist the mutual temptation to
assume that other people's worlds would be so
much better if only they were like us. Such
positions allow us to air-brush our own
iniquities from our conscousness.

Anyway, if we continue to consider ourselves
as the sole repositories of virtue and
enlightenment, the only outcome is going to
be perpetual and escalating conflict.
Whether this will be cured depends very much
on people like us.

There's a lot of soul-searching going on here, which is nice.

I didn't know how long OLO had been going. I was introduced to it by a friend, and it has become engrossing. I suspect virtual communities like OLO compensate for the demise of community in the physical world. I'm struck too by how inflexible we are about our opinions. They're held with such dogged conviction of their rightness and rectitude in their respective camps. We can't all be right, of course, though we could all be wrong. It's hard to resist Wittgenstein's conclusion that it's all just language games.

Cynical perhaps, but I think Gillard's playing the PC card is just another shrewd (lol) political move. She's made a political gamble following the conservatives on border protection, obviously to steal some votes, but in order not to offend the "intelligentsia" on the left she assures them it's ok to air their repressed anxieties. PC is Australia's unofficial institution and I suspect the (not)soft on asylum seekers approach on OLO (which I'm not familiar with) is probably ingenuously disingenuous (or vice versa) in many cases.
OLO is where we get to "represent" our ideal one-dimensional selves, where language can airbrush our mundane defects and make us suave or sexy or simpering or assertive; where we can be our real selves; how we wish or imagine ourselves to be, or how we actually are, without all the other role-play and props and typecasting we're forced to accommodate in the fictional real world... Whatever.
One very healthy aspect of OLO is it continues to be cynical about politics. Our politicians are the least "inspired" or "genuine" of any in history imo. Which is perhaps a good thing; such convictions were/are dangerous/luxuries respectively. We're better off without them. We'd be better off representing ourselves collectively rather than being represented as a collective by some, who knows, crazed representation. Perhaps there's wisdom in numbers?
I can't vote for either major party. I even grudge my preference be directed to their populist policies.

Political correctness has been put to very effective use in Australia. The creation of the Red Haired Hanson Monster out of a politically unsophisticated Ipswich housewife is an excellent example. Even now there are those who try to call up the Hanson Monster to reawaken and re-power the simplistic stereotypes used to derail and frustrate opposing opinion, however well founded in fact and reason.

What was really offensive about Hanson's treatment was that ordinary people, in particular women, were warned off political participation for fear that they would be subjected to similar personal attack and humiliation. Even more worrying is the reality that the baying mob was so easily whistled up and manipulated, with so many tertiary 'educated' people involved.

Matter of fact, many of Hanson's most trenchant and unfair critics in the media were highly educated and some were university academics - who felt free to flaunt their positions to add weight to their opinions. Few ever stopped to examine what Hanson actually said or might have meant, they were too keen to indulge in the ritual of PC blood-letting for that.

One sees the same sort of thing in microcosm on OLO. For example, a respondent was moved to apologise in advance, deferring to one of the PC nuisances before proffering an opinion. He received a backhander in return of course, but still went on and more power to him.

However the most concerning aspect of PC is that people who are more introverted and could add depth and perspective through their well targeted questions and observations are likely not to bother to comment at all. That cuts out a lot of possible talent. I feel at a loss for that because as someone who always has too much on the go and drafts OLO replies quickly, I am one who appreciates the input of those with restraint and an eye for detail. There are some very capable, logical, reasonable, generous, sensitive and effective individuals out there who should be heard.

contd..

To conclude,

Q, Does the OLO approach work on OLO?
A, To an extent but there are obviously many who drop off or do not contribute.

Q, Will the OLO approach work for JG?
A, To a limited extent and only for a short while, unless she can rely on the support of others around her in the parliament and in the media to eschew the cheap shots in the interests of the nation. Of course that assumes that Julia is serious in her concerns and she should be given the benefit of the doubt for that for a while at least.

One thing is for sure and that is that the 'new' electronic means of communication are here to stay and fewer people are prepared to read more than a score of words - ideal for PC!