Thirty years ago today, President Reagan gave his 34th and final address from the Oval office as he prepared to step down from the presidency.

The address can be viewed here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UKVsq2daR8Q

a transcript here:

http://www.nytimes.com/1989/01/12/news/transcript-of-reagan-s-farewell-address-to-american-people.html

Its always fraught to look back and see the past as so much better than the present. Rose coloured glasses are subtle and difficult to remove.

Nonetheless, viewing that speech, I can't but reflect on how much we've lost in those thirty years in terms of the quality of our leadership.

There is no politician anywhere in the world today who can hold a candle to the quiet dignity and convictions of Reagan. When we consider his contemporaries ( Thatcher, Kohl, Gorbachev, Walesa, John Paul...even our own Hawke) it seems to me to be unassailable that we are ill-served these days and have been for quite some time.

A people get the leadership they deserve. Perhaps we don't deserve better.

Hi, there MHAZE...I couldn't agree with you more. The noun 'Leader' is sadly, no longer part of the political vocabulary, unfortunately.

Mhaze,

Feeling a little "jaundiced" today, are we?

What we have lost is sad, what we're in danger of losing is beyond the compehension of those who support that trend.
I'll definitely vote independent with preferences going to the Coalition. I'm not allowed to do any more for this nation.

Individual- I believe "the Conservatives have truth on their side". Some call it "my brand of Conservatism" I think your view is more reliable than some. But the issue is how to help "Middle Australia" understand what Conservatives stand for. "Middle Australia" has a limited attention span so need to use sound bites to avoid "boring them". Many of the debates we have here on OLO can be used in shortened form to make a Conservative case. Politics is like the army or the police force- discipline is required to reach targets. Everyone has contacts they can influence- we need to understand the contact- find the arguments that can influence them- then let it fly- it's a slow process. It can be very frustrating to see people destroying themselves- watching but not able to stop it- but attacking problems must be done with discipline- control and direct the anger. Killing a snake- consider the head and the tail- even those we love have a snake inside- keep it sleeping and confused- the mind is the greatest weapon. Man's work- protect the community- ignore the agony- focus on the goal.

The Communists and the Free Trade Lobby have pushed their philosophy for many years while the Conservatives have been silent. The "Middle" can't visualize where the Conservatives fit in the landscape- we need to give them a vision...

ttbn,

When I called your claims jaundiced it was in the context of you having completely ignored a vast body of data and facts because they didn't suit what you wanted to be true. The very opposite of intelligent. Given that context for the word, no I don't feel jaundiced.

An undisciplined society is a society going to the dogs.
Australia is on the verge of losing to out to runaway mayhem. We need a National service to arrest this snowballing degradation of our society.
The myth of Democracy & Socialism has been exposed to be merely a tool for free-loading, greed & crime & has now reached the point of unsustainability.
A National Service would rejuvenate the senses of responsibility & respect. We only need to look at history where we'll be heading if we just stand back & let the insipids dictate to us.
Give ALP/LNP a big scare so as to wake up what being a Government entails. We need the kind of party Don Chipp had in mind to keep the bastards honest before it got hijacked by smart enough to be parasitic but too stupid to be of use to society Academics.

Individual- National Service and Cadets are good ideas- it teaches a number of useful skills to citizens including leadership, discipline, resilience. The Scouts filled this role in the past- but appear to have become corrupted- though I'm a bit separated from this space. At least the LNP don't have family reunions as part of their policy- which brings unproductive people to Australia.

In this way "the LNP immigration policy is slightly better for Conservative / Traditionalists" than the ALP policy.

Yes Don Chipp is an interesting guy- his wife is still working hard I believe. I see immigration as the biggest issue affecting Australia- so any politician needs to have a strong stand here. I believe sadly that the "Australian Conservatives" (Cory Bernardi) are still advocating an immigration rate of net 100kpa more than "Sustainability Australia" net 60kpa though at least they're both much better than the major parties. Other parties such as "One Nation" have a zero net immigration policy.

Some like to paint Cory Bernardi as extreme but I see him as very mild with regards to what is required to address the problems with high immigration- that have developed since the Howard era and before.

Immigration policy is another way in which Communist forces attempt to disrupt society.

Canem malum,
I still shudder from hearing that this Govt is considering handing out the Visa application process to private contractors. Can you imagine what kind of society Australia will beome if they go ahead with that ?

Individual- I agree the prospect of private Visa processing is beyond appalling. But things are pretty appalling now- especially when people won't act.

Would Cory Bernardi's Australian Conservatives be a viable option to restore some order in the Australian Public service ?
The other Independents have lost the plot !

Individual- Cory Bernardi's Australian Conservatives would be a step in the right direction- but I would prefer bigger steps.

All politicians say silly things at times IMHO. I'm most concerned about immigration- anyone that is willing to reduce it has my vote.

Canem Malum,
Well, yes at least the right kind of immigration. By that I mean people who are keen on building a better life for themselves & the nation as a whole. Not those who just want an easy life from the efforts others & turn the Nation into a hole.

Individual- In my opinion all immigration needs to stop- Australia though it's land is large has a small holding capacity. But yes diversity will prove divisive. If you can divide your enemies you can beat them. Australian's have been relatively good contemporary custodian's of the land over many years.

Any growing community needs diversity to function but it's not cultural diversity, it's genetic diversity that brings cohesion. We have had in-breeding for too long & now we're suffering the consequences yet people refuse to acknowlege the problem.
The lately-present in-breeding is cultural & the result is so clearly dividing us. Immigration goes a small step towards watering down such problems but it must be selective immigration with a view to compatibility.
There's no way this planet could handle more people let alone an increase of progressive mentality.
Can anyone provide information on progressives being a positive influence in society ?
The most important requirement is to de-muddy the gene pool to arrest the regress push by the progressives. Education must be taken off the progressives' hands if we want to be serious about our future.

Individual- I have some respectful criticisms below...

Comment 1- Any growing community needs diversity to function but it's not cultural diversity, it's genetic diversity that brings cohesion.

Answer 1- I have an interest in Ayn Rand she makes some interesting points. She seems to represent the "small L liberal"/ "free market" view. Business has a place in the community but can be a problem when it dominates. I feel that some "small L liberals" and business interests pretend to be conservative- perhaps compared to global companies they are. This is "a source" of the rift in the Liberal Party in Australia- liberals pretence for conservatism on the right. It makes the whole party irrational in the public eyes.

Of course being of the conservative view that cultural diversity is divisive.

I don't believe we should have "a growing community" from an economic or population perspective. I don't want to get into an argument about the validity of environmental impact but suffice to say and despite the criticism- Malthusianism has value- we can't have continual growth in my view.

I can't see genetic diversity as being anything but divisive- yes you can safely have trace amounts of different genetics in the community- but genetic diversity leads inevitably to cultural diversity.

Small L liberals are always going to want to be able to use immigration to throttle wages because the workers seize political power. Ironically a more managed economy (more conservative less liberal) would also provide more certainty as to wage costs for businesses (though I can understand that Free Traders would see that as a loss of power).

Everyone in the community needs to benefit from the community structure in order to participate (Nobel Prize Winner Joseph Stiglitz also said this). Everyone wants more power those with power have a greater ability to gather more- this creates instability- it creates opportunities for economic raiders and other types of raiders- raiders should probably be discouraged in favour of stability within the community.

There was a philosophy after Henry VIII that those that utilised land for the most profit should own it- this appears to be the basis for poverty and disruption and landlessness- until the age of "the landed gentry" land couldn't be bought and sold- people that were considered as part of the land had rights to timber and water. Under Elizabeth I trades were brought from Europe to settle in the UK to develop new industries of Iron, Glass, and ship building- this is one of the first instances of Social Liberalism. While one could argue that new industries are an "absolute good" (I wouldn't) and are important for their economic and national security- it was also used underhandedly to undermine wages. Liberalism is responsible for much harm in contemporary communities. Small L liberals/ Businesses like to talk about "regulatory stability" while they prey on the workers stability (sometimes they deserve it)- this is the mess that liberalism has created.

Conservatism is about stability for everyone.

Comment 2- We have had in-breeding for too long & now we're suffering the consequences yet people refuse to acknowlege the problem.
The lately-present in-breeding is cultural & the result is so clearly dividing us. Immigration goes a small step towards watering down such problems but it must be selective immigration with a view to compatibility.

Answer2- I don't consider that in-breeding at a state or national level is an issue. One could argue that genetic diversity is an "absolute good" due to evening out of genetic weaknesses- but this discredits the validity of psychology and group cohesion.

Comment 3- There's no way this planet could handle more people let alone an increase of progressive mentality.
Can anyone provide information on progressives being a positive influence in society ?

Answer3- I agree with this. The Progressive Communists (Social Liberals) seem to want to use the high population of the third world as a hammer to destroy the Economic Liberals- I think this path will destroy everyone on the social and economic sides. This would harm the rationality and stability of the world and return it to a dark age.

Comment 4- The most important requirement is to de-muddy the gene pool to arrest the regress push by the progressives. Education must be taken off the progressives' hands if we want to be serious about our future.

Answer 4- Individual could be contradicting himself here with respect to his previous comments above.

I agree that we need to return to our British gene pool in Australia as it solidifies our common identity and purpose. Some call this eugenics- so be it- it was the misuse of power that created the Liberal mess. Reducing the world's population would be a good start- once there is more space in the world then perhaps it will relieve the demand for land and resources and the potential for war. We'll need to work together to achieve this.

Canem Malum,
I can't disagree with your assessment. I'm just a little puzzled by #4 . Perhaps I didn't put it clearly & you're reading something into it that I didn't actually mean.
By the gene pool I didn't mean racial but rather intellectual & as in mentality. For example we now have 3rd generation welfare dependent families & third generation bureaucrats & we don't seem to work on thawing that snowball.
Re the gene pool I can only add that I know people from varied racial/ethnic background who put bristish ancestry Australians to shame in every aspect & also many of the multicultural who should have been deported decades ago for their refusal to accept & share the workload of Australians.
The front runners in causing the breakdown in society from my personal experiences, are the fence-sitters in the public service.

Individual- I generally agree with your comments but I thought in this case I felt that I needed to clarify some aspects. I'm a but cautious about the delineation of certain positions. I hope I explained this in the previous post.

One thing we have lost is incentive to perform. Once the Left got a hold in politics it was no longer viable for the workforce to put in in that extra yard because the real workers are simply watching their efforts & tax dollars squandered on the hangers-on.
We need to find a way to reward effort rather than reward some ficticious "qualification" which is of no use to those who pay for it.
The term qualification should be made obvious in the way that this "qualification" is actually of benefit to society as a whole. If we don't work on changing the situation the end result will too dreadful to even think about. We must get reward for effort & result !
A National Service would be a real bonus to all.

Individual- I'm a fan of your comments. I don't necessarily agree with everything but you're definitely on the right track in my view.