.

I have never met our head of state, Her Royal Majesty, Queen Elizabeth II, any of our prime ministers, premiers, federal or state ministers, MPs or senators. The only elected political representatives I have ever met are my local mayor and the odd regional councillor.

I vote for people I don’t know and have never met. Sometimes they are elected, sometimes they are not. When they are elected, they don’t know I voted for them. They don’t know what I expect them to do on my behalf.

Nobody ever asks me what I want or what I think of proposed new laws, acts, rules or regulations.

The person I elected takes his orders from his political party, not from me. If he does not toe the party line, he risks exclusion.

But who controls and manipulates the political parties behind the scenes ? The economic elite and well-organised special interest groups, of course.

That’s not democracy. That’s oligarchy.

Instead of voting for political parties or individuals we don’t know and have never met, who, once elected, take their orders from their parties acting, not in the general interest, but in their own interests or in the interests of the economic elite and well-organised special interest groups, wouldn’t it be better for us to vote on the legislation they propose – and fix the rules ourselves ?

.

Banjo Paterson,
Welcome to so-called democracy where a hand full of mostly academic-background "Experts" dictate to the majority with impunity !

;But who controls and manipulates the political parties behind the scenes ? The economic elite and well-organised special interest groups, of course.'

certainly agree with you on that one Banjo. And of course the media play a big part. Remember about 10 years ago Gillard and Wong were against same sex marriage. Remember when Abbott called climate change crap. Remember when Rudd said he was a fiscal conservative. There is little doubt that most don't hold to their principles if their power is threatened. Hiding behind the 'experts' is code for cowardice and appears to be the latest way to justify any action. Obviously the 'experts' are ignored when the lying narrative is exposed.

Individual wrote: "Welcome to so-called democracy where a hand full of mostly academic-background "Experts" dictate to the majority with impunity !"

Dear Individual,

I hope more experts with an academic background advise government. I prefer them to real estate developers, mining magnates, shock jocks, reactionary columnists and Rupert Murdoch. An expert with an academic background is more likely to have an objective interest, greater knowledge and be more likely to serve the needs of the general public than real estate developers, mining magnates, shock jocks, reactionary columnists and Rupert Murdoch. Why distrust knowledge?

Dear Banjo,

I have met my local councillors. I have met several
state premiers, past and present. I have met my federal
Member of Parliament - and his opposition. I have met
several other MPs from various parties.

All in all, I have found that despite all the criticisms
the men and women who work the machinery of our liberal
democratic way of life are decent people who do reflect
public opinion - and at their best lead public opinion
and transmute it into laws that shape our society and
our country.

I have no doubt that our future is solid in their hands -
and that we can find the solutions that suit us to any
problems that come up, as we have always done. Provided
of course that we don't succumb to the siren calls of
demagogues, charlatans, and ideologues.

Dear Banjo,

I belong to the Greens. We are not supported by big money or unions. We have many discussions of policy in which the opinions of all members are welcome. All political parties welcome new members. Have you taken the trouble to get acquainted with any of the Australian political parties? There are avenues by which you can get your views known. As a member of a party you can have a voice in policy and candidates. Australia is a representative democracy. If you want a bigger say join and be active in a party.

Banjo,

Fair question. Easy answer - no one. Australia is rooted.

Why distrust knowledge?
david f,
no-one distrusts knowledge. people distrust & deservedly those educated people who haven't got the mentality to utilise the knowledge placed in front of them but which they failed to absorb.
There's a massive difference between being educated & having sense & it is mostly sense that these learned people lack. The evidence is all around us !
Hell, you can't get into Govt or senior bureaucrat decision making circles without a UNI Degree so, who is making those decisions that got our nations to the dire stage ?

Dear individual,

It sounds to me as though you distrust knowledge. There is a strain in society that distrusts the intellectual - those who contribute to the public debate with a background of knowledge. I don't think our nation is in dire straits. Under the present government we have a far better record of dealing with the pandemic than the US, Brazil or Sweden. As an old man my quality of life is quite good in Australia. It is good for many people. There are attempts to make things better for Aborigines or other groups who are disadvantaged in Australia. Banjo Paterson remarks that he hasn't been in contact with those who make the decisions in our society. As long as things are going well why would he need that contact?

From what I can see we are not in dire straits, our educated people in academia generally have good sense. There are things I would change in Australia. I would like to see the military called that rather than be labelled defense. I would like to see debate on the military budget, greater separation of religion and state and greater concern for the environment. However, as far as Australia being in dire straits that is utter rubbish, and those who have immigrated here or would like to be here know it is utter rubbish. Compared to most other nations we're doing great.

Why do you think we're in dire straits?

.

Dear Individual,

.

You wrote :

« Welcome to so-called democracy where a hand full of mostly academic-background "Experts" dictate to the majority with impunity ! »
.

You raise an interesting point there, Individual. The coronavirus pandemic has underlined the paradoxical relationship between so-called “experts” and politicians.

At the outbreak of the pandemic in France, the “experts” declared that masks were necessary for medical staff only and that the public didn’t need to wear them.

It was later revealed that the government had liquidated the national security stock of one billion masks and decided not to renew them for budgetary reasons. The “experts” had declared that there was no need for people to wear masks simply because there were no masks.

Another example that comes to mind is the contradictory discourses of President Trump and one of his principal scientific advisers, Dr Anthony Fauci. Another scientific adviser, Dr Deborah Birx, has been accused by the president of the House of Representatives, Nancy Pelosi, of politicising her discourse in collusion with Donald Trump.

Some experts lack the modesty to admit their ignorance and lack of experience in certain domains relative to their expertise. Some treat laypeople with disdain and only tell them what they think they need to know. Others simply play politics.

Some politicians, like Donald Trump, choose to ignore scientific evidence and pretend to know better than qualified professionals. Others choose to hide behind the considered opinion of so-called “experts” to avoid assuming responsibility for difficult or unpopular decisions.

But, can “experts”, as you say, “dictate to the majority” ?

Certainly, there are always a certain number of individuals who are easily influenced and ready to believe anything – but in a country of free speech like Australia where other voices, just as equally qualified, can also make themselves heard, they (the so-called “experts”) could only succeed in obtaining the adhesion of a majority of the population to their theses by putting forward irrefutable scientific arguments, the validity of which their pairs are obliged to acknowledge.

That is not dictation. It is scientific argument.

.

.

Dear runner,

.

You add :

« There is little doubt that most [politicians] don't hold to their principles if their power is threatened. Hiding behind the 'experts' is code for cowardice and appears to be the latest way to justify any action »
.

Professional politicians are a devious breed of individuals, runner, especially the elite politicians at the top – those who manage to scramble over their pairs and occupy the highest posts. They can be quite ruthless – veritable wolves in sheep's clothing.

None of that, of course, is visible to the naked (or should I say naïve) eye. They are charismatic individuals who inspire confidence and respect, sometimes even sympathy – men or women of (apparent) integrity and principle, (seemingly) capable of leading their nation with conviction, intelligence, and authority, with its best interests at heart.

In any event, electors’ choice usually boils down to one of (at most) two or three possible candidates with not much to go on to separate the wheat from the chaff – and no guarantee they’re not all chaff.

The political system is a terrible mincing machine.

.

Dear Foxy,

.

You indicate :

« I have met my local councillors. I have met several state premiers, past and present. I have met my federal Member of Parliament - and his opposition. I have met several other MPs from various parties »

Nobody can accuse you of not taking an active interest in politics, Foxy, that’s for sure. It’s quite remarkable and admirable.

You add :

« All in all, I have found that despite all the criticisms the men and women who work the machinery of our liberal democratic way of life are decent people who do reflect public opinion »

I’m sure you’re right. In their large majority, they are “decent people who do reflect public opinion”.

The problem is the system of so-called “representative democracy” as it is set-up, operated and controlled by the political parties and the oligarchs pulling the strings behind the scenes.

.

Anyone with any logic could have seen advantage of masks.

Relying on so-called expert opinion should never be an excuse for personal logical thinking.

Once the virus is in my community,I would never go anywhere without a mask. Just another important way to reduce risk.

I believe our representatives should be people from various industries and services who employ at least ten people under them. Without knowledge of employment and industries and services, we are not adequately represented. There are to many second rate lawyers and self appointed hacks who have no idea of the needs of industries and employment. Leaders of industry and services have the best ideas of needs and employment. The idea that anyone can be a politician is nonsense. This leads to the lowest common denominator, because they have the best oratory skills.

.

Dear David f.,

.

You indicate :

« I belong to the Greens. We are not supported by big money or unions. We have many discussions of policy in which the opinions of all members are welcome … Have you taken the trouble to get acquainted with any of the Australian political parties ? … »
.

At the last count, David, I understand there are 27 political parties in Australia. I value my freedom too highly to swear allegiance to any one political party. I prefer to do what I can in complete independence, as little and insignificant as that may happen be.

Ideas have no frontiers. If I ever have an original idea, it doesn’t matter when, where or how I express it, it will travel. If others have the same idea, I don’t need to express it. They will. Then, if it is adopted, what I will have wanted to achieve will have been achieved – without my having to utter a single word.

I learned that from my competitors. They were always quick to copy the few original ideas I had during my professional life. The rest was common knowledge.

.

Dear ttbn,

.

I asked :

« … wouldn’t it be better for us to vote on the legislation they propose – and fix the rules ourselves ? »

And you replied :

« Fair question. Easy answer - no one. Australia is rooted »
.

I must confess your “Easy answer” leaves me somewhat perplex, ttbn. I have difficulty working out who or what the “no one” refers to.

Do you mean that “no one” should fix the rules, and there should be no rules in Australia, the reason being that as you consider that “Australia is rooted” it doesn’t need any rules ?

If so, that’s a pretty pessimistic position, ttbn, and a rather anarchistic one at that, if you don't mind my saying so.

That said, I would be interested to hear who you think the revolutionary rapist was.

.

There is a strain in society that distrusts the intellectual
david f,
You've hit the nail on the head. The intellectuals en masse have morphed into a self admiration crowd rather than solve society's challenges. They're hugely economically unproductive & simply unviable.
The handful of REAL educated professionals & scientists are always referred to in debates as a distraction. The actual number of intellectuals on the public purse vs the economic benefits is never disclosed because if it were, Education would be closed down.
Why do you think the Goaf got into Govt ? He got rid of our national Service which appealed hugely to the snowflake brigade of the 70's & replaced it with an intellectual gravy train without responsibilities for them. No brakes were designed into this train that just keeps on rolling at the expense of the masses in private enterprise not from the economic returns from the intellectuals !

There is a strain in society that distrusts the intellectual
david f,
You've hit the nail on the head. The intellectuals en masse have morphed into a self admiration crowd rather than solve society's challenges. They're hugely economically unproductive economically simply unviable.
The handful of REAL educated professionals & scientists are always referred to in debates as a distraction. The actual number of intellectuals on the public purse vs the economic benefits is never disclosed because if it were, Education would be closed down.
Why do you think the Goaf got into Govt ? He got rid of our national Service which appealed hugely to the snowflake brigade of the 70's & replaced it with an intellectual gravy train without responsibilities for them. No brakes were designed into this train that just keeps on rolling at the expense of the masses in private enterprise not from the economic returns from the intellectuals !

Well, given that anyone can seek to be selected, you cant do much than vote for those who front up.

That is democracy

.

Dear Chris Lewis,

.

You wrote :

« Anyone with any logic could have seen advantage of masks »
.

Right, but there were no masks in France at the outbreak of the pandemic and it took a while for people to realise that the experts’ recommendations were not based on science but on politics.

People started to try to make their own masks as best they could with whatever material they could find and, realising its mistake, the government frantically sought to import as many masks as it could from China at exorbitant prices.

The Americans hijacked one planeload of masks destined for France by paying three times the price France had agreed to pay.

.

Dear Josephus,

.

You wrote :

« I believe our representatives should be people from various industries and services who employ at least ten people under them. Without knowledge of employment and industries and services, we are not adequately represented »
.

That sounds like good sense. I hope your message reaches the ears of the prime minister.

.

Josephus wrote: “I believe our representatives should be people from various industries and services who employ at least ten people under them. Without knowledge of employment and industries and services, we are not adequately represented. There are to many second rate lawyers and self appointed hacks who have no idea of the needs of industries and employment. Leaders of industry and services have the best ideas of needs and employment. The idea that anyone can be a politician is nonsense. This leads to the lowest common denominator, because they have the best oratory skills.”

Dear Josephus,

You have just described the corporate legislature of Fascism under Mussolini. We fought Italian Fascism in WW2.

While the legislature concerned itself solely with the running of the economic engine the energies of the people were directed to serve the state. The slogan of this tyranny was ‘Credere, Obedire, Combattere’. ‘Believe, Obey, Fight’. There was an unholy alliance of state with the Catholic Church. Democrats, atheists, socialists, communists, Jews, peasants who protested the oppression of landlord and others who did not fit into the Fascist state were persecuted, tortured, imprisoned or executed. Mussolini wished to restore the past glories of the Roman Empire He called the Mediterranean Sea ‘Mare Nostrum’, our sea.

As it is in Australia, our legislature with all its faults considers not only the needs of industry but the welfare of all Australians, the environment, the needs of the military, the protection of democracy and other concerns of Australia. It is elected by the people of Australia. More and more I think Australia is a great place, and its system is a great system. When I hear of suggested alternatives I think of Churchill’s words:

‘Many forms of Government have been tried, and will be tried in this world of sin and woe. No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed it has been said that democracy is the worst form of Government except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.…’

Winston S Churchill, 11 November 1947

Banjo,

Me no understand why you perplex(ed). When I say no one is running Australia, I mean no one is running Australia. We are in freefall. The people who are SUPPOSED to be running Australia are not doing so. There is not a decent person in Australian politics; the idiots in Canberra are greedy SOBs who have never had a real job or could never have got the huge pay we give them if they were in a real job.

The total stuff up of their fumblings with the Chinese virus and their gutless denial of the Chinese threat to Australia, are the standouts of the moment; but it is a long time since we have had people who could be respected as leaders and relied upon to do the right thing. Australia is rooted.

david f,

I alone can do nothing.
Even if I were to find and gather all those of like mind, WE could do nothing.
The structure and actual workings of system of govt, or democracy, is designed to serve the servants and not the those who the servants are meant to serve.
The laws are designed with a form of blackmail; Do as I say or else.
The govt is elected by only half the voters consent.
The ministers have at different levels and opportunities gouged or benefited from their position in office.
I won't waste my posting on describing what you all already know, and most of you know a lot more than you say.
Anyone who thinks that those in govt, all levels of govt, are there because they want to "make difference", well I am not allowed to say or call you what you truly are.
Someone has already spewed her rosy and totally sickening adoration of these criminals by suggesting she has never met a bad polly and that they are decent people who reflect public opinion.
Well I've got news for those of you who agree with such bunkum and bull-dust.
IT IS NOT SO!
Any idiot will tell you that even a salesman is "quite nice" when you are buying something, but try and get any sense out of them once they sold you something.
People these are scheming charlatans, ALL of them, as I said before, even if they were naive twits on the way in they will be seasoned thieves on the way out.
My idea of life is not these egregious and constraining laws and rules, and because the current system only caters to half the population, it is a complete and utter farce.
I believe we should be allowed to do whatever we wish, and only when someone is harmed do we invoke an appropriate punishment, BUT, only if it is proven to have been intentional.
Some rules stay, but generally people should be left to themselves on the understanding that there are consequences, for malicious acts, NOT for accidents.

Dear Banjo,

Thank you very much for this thread. It has made it more evident to me how much I appreciate living in Australia. Nobody from government has consulted you about your ideas, wants and needs. Since Australia has millions of people it would require a vast bureaucracy to contact every citizen about his or her ideas, wants and needs. Australia does not have a bureaucracy deficiency. We do not need more. People with similar outlooks get together in political parties, but you wish to preserve your independence. What do you want the government of Australia to do for you that it is not already doing? What would you tell a representative of the Australian government if that person asked for your input?

As an individual who does not belong to a political party do you want somebody in government assigned to you to find out your ideas, wants and needs?

david f,

your last paragraph is exactly what we need.
There is always a better way, but unfortunately there are too many competing factions and ideologies to be able to get consensus.
People are lazy and complacent, just to mention two of the many faults and flaws that permeate through a populace.
I disagree with this form of management which is referred to as Democracy.
It is merely a vehicle to lull the people into a false sense of security.
It's un-acceptable to say that this is the BEST system of running a country.
For those who lack depth and breadth of thought, I wish to remind them that all this freedom and fortune they enjoy, was NOT due to good management, but COMPLETELY due to the absolute abundance and an overwhelmingly large natural resources and primary industry, when you compare our population to export income ratio.
So without these bonuses we would be no better off than the rest of the world, that doesn't have access to free money making resources.
And while I'm at it, why do you think we get this on-going BS of a campaign trying to get access to more and more, so called, useless land.
Historically, the Kimberley was a vast area of "useless land", until a white fella, and not a very smart or educated one, thought otherwise.
So once this and other white fellas create the wealth, for some reason it belongs to others who have no overarching or rightful ownership, to either the land or it's resources.
And so it is that more greedy scum find ways of availing themselves of the money and wealth and handing it over to a select few, when it actually and legally belongs to EVERYBODY, and should be distributed amongst everybody.
This Democracy is rubbish and only benefits those who have the say, and that's NOT US!

(the so-called “experts”) could only succeed in obtaining the adhesion of a majority of the population to their theses by putting forward irrefutable scientific arguments, the validity
Banjo Paterson,
That is assuming that the 'theses' are more than theses & are in fact fact !
These theses invariably turn out to be just theses hence the the incessant strafing of common sense with the only weapon they have, Indoctrination, preceded by poor education/teaching !

I wonder where the science 'experts' who claimed 10 years ago Australia would not have anymore snow or dams in Sydney would never fill again have gone? No accountability.

'I wonder where the science 'experts' who claimed 10 years ago Australia would not have anymore snow or dams in Sydney would never fill again have gone? No accountability.' wrote runner.

Dear runner,

Please cite where and when anybody said Australia would not have anymore snow or dams in Sydney would never fill again. I never heard about it.

We all have a voice on election day, and thereafter by communicating with our representatives. The fact remains many are not more than a person off the street with no intelligent understanding of economics or industry and services. We have elected persons who have no idea of handling economies and earn more as a representative than they ever did in any other form of employment. Persons who have worked in the real world and employed staff in their business or service should know how to run the country, and any remuneration be to reimburse for their time. No lifetime Pension, just for the time served and private perks.

For instance: We have politicians more interested in Black lives Matter than the welfare of abused aboriginal women and children in remote communities; who have more interest in aborting babies of single mums than supporting dysfunctional families. We need persons who can successfully represent ministries to the aboriginal community and the dysfunction of family life rather than believing money solves problems.

We need persons who can successfully represent ministries
Josephus,
Plenty of such people out there but Govt ignores them & invariably calls on Experts !
I think particularly Bureaucrats & Engineers build firewalls which prevents people who know to upstage them !

david f

if you are quick you may be able to read this before the big techs censor anything that shows how idiotic the gw narrative is and the numerous failed predictions by scientist.

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2015/11/12/one-of-the-longest-running-climate-prediction-blunders-has-disappeared-from-the-internet/

Dear runner,

Thank you for that.

Strange, Runner, that URL is still there ! 'They' haven't censored it.

Yet. But soon ........ surely by tomorrow ?

Jo

'Strange, Runner, that URL is still there ! 'They' haven't censored it.'

certainly got rid of many front line doctors who have saved lives using Hydroxychloroquine, but heh proving the President wrong is more important than saving lives Joe. Quite disgraceful but I suppose when everything is conspiracy except Gates and Fauci then its understandable eh Joe.

runner,

A couple of things.

1) You've cited from a blog promoting climate
change denial which accommodates beliefs that
are in opposition to scientific consensus on
climate change. With very little cred.

2) Regarding hydroxychloroquine?

The doctors you're referring to are a very small
group and are aligned with the Trump administration
(that doesn't believe in science, doesn't believe in facts).

These doctors are completely compatible with the Trump
White house.

This is the same gorup that has questioned whether HIV
causes AIDS (it does) argued abortion causes cancer
(it does not) linked vaccines to autism (repeatedly debunked)
and even alleged former president Barack Obama used
hypnosis techniques to trick voters, especially Jewish
people, into supporting him (NO).

This group is lobbying on behalf of what they belief to
be right - but invariably medical experts disagree on
their stance on hydroxychloroquine .
The drug has shown mixed results and the dangerous of
potentially life-threatening side-effects of patients.

Foxy

'This is the same gorup that has questioned whether HIV
causes AIDS (it does) argued abortion causes cancer
(it does not) linked vaccines to autism (repeatedly debunked)
and even alleged former president Barack Obama used
hypnosis techniques to trick voters, especially Jewish
people, into supporting him (NO).
'

evidence please?

.

Dear ttbn,

.

You answered :

« … I mean no one is running Australia. We are in freefall. The people who are SUPPOSED to be running Australia are not doing so.
The total stuff up of their fumblings with the Chinese virus and their gutless denial of the Chinese threat to Australia, are the standouts of the moment but it is a long time since we have had people who could be respected as leaders and relied upon to do the right thing »
.

Thanks for the clarification, ttbn. I appreciate it.

I understand your frustration and deception, but the problem is not that simple. The calibre of our politicians is just part of the equation. Short-term governments have short-term views. Pandemics are long-term menaces.

Every country in the world has a short-term government (between 3 – 5 years). None were prepared for a pandemic of the brutality and severity of COVID 19. Australia was no exception – and we were by no means the worst off in terms of emergency health-care.

As for the Chinese threat, there’s no doubt we are currently sitting on the hot seat between two opposing superpowers on a collision course. China is our largest trading partner and the US the third-largest (after China and Japan). The US is our top foreign investor and China (including Hong Kong) our fifth most important foreign investor (behind the US, UK, Belgium and Japan).

It seems to me that our current government is doing its best to assert Australia’s independence as a sovereign nation, despite our close ties to the US under the ANZUS defence treaty, and continue to maintain the best possible relations with China under the circumstances, while, at the same time, denouncing what we consider to be its “illegal” territorial claims in the Pacific region and resisting the hegemonic pressure it exerts on our domestic policies.

It’s no easy task and requires our comprehension, encouragement and full, resolute support. There is danger in the air.

.

.

Dear david f.,

.

You wrote :

« Nobody from government has consulted you about your ideas, wants and needs. Since Australia has millions of people it would require a vast bureaucracy to contact every citizen about his or her ideas, wants and needs … do you want somebody in government assigned to you to find out your ideas, wants and needs ? »
.

That's my point, David. How can anyone – who does not know me, never met me, has no idea what I want or how I want him to vote on each particular project of law – represent me ?

We are 17,231,901 Australians eligible to vote (as at June 2020). We all have the same problem, though only 16,635,280 of us are registered on the electoral roll.

The individuals we elect to parliament are not in a position to represent us. They are legislators acting on behalf of their political parties to which they are accountable. The political parties are, themselves, controlled and manipulated behind the scenes by the economic elite and well-organised special interest groups.

What we have is a hybrid system of democratically elected legislators operating as an oligarchy from which we, the 16,635,280 electors are excluded.

What I am suggesting is that we continue to allow the parliament to handle all the daily run-of-the-mill matters as at present, but that all important pieces of legislation be dealt with by direct democracy via a dedicated, state of the art, electronic communications network.

Modern technology could provide us with the means to vote safely and securely. It could provide us with all the necessary information on the issues we are to vote on as well as videos of debates on the issues by competent specialists. We could also exchange ideas among ourselves on appropriate forums and social media.

All this pleads in favour of our active participation in the important political decisions that affect our lives and the lives of our families, friends and fellow Australians. Voting by direct democracy on issues we consider to be important is technically and economically possible.

.

Dear Banjo,

You wrote: "All this pleads in favour of our active participation in the important political decisions that affect our lives and the lives of our families, friends and fellow Australians. Voting by direct democracy on issues we consider to be important is technically and economically possible."

Who would decide what issues would be subject to direct democracy? In Norway political advertising is not allowed at a period before election, and there must be direct debate between candidates. Something analogous could be done for spokespeople on issues. How would they be selected?

.

Dear Individual,

.

You wrote :

« (the so-called “experts”) could only succeed in obtaining the adhesion of a majority of the population to their theses by putting forward irrefutable scientific arguments, the validity of which their peers are obliged to acknowledge.

« Banjo Paterson,

« That is assuming that the 'theses' are more than theses & are in fact fact !

« These theses invariably turn out to be just theses hence the incessant strafing of common sense with the only weapon they have, Indoctrination, preceded by poor education/teaching ! »
.

As I indicated in the post to which you refer, Individual :

« There are always a certain number of individuals who are easily influenced and ready to believe anything – but in a country of free speech like Australia there are other voices, just as equally qualified, which can also make themselves heard »

That would make it extremely difficult for any “experts” to, as you say, “dictate to the majority” by “incessant strafing” and “indoctrination”.

Their theses would be immediately challenged and invalidated by their peers as well as the relevant medical professional organisations and government authorities – as was the case recently with the French microbiologist, Prof. Raoult, who gained worldwide renown during the COVID-19 pandemic for promoting hydroxychloroquine as a treatment for the disease.

As you may know, Donald Trump announced that he had taken the drug and was convinced it protected him. Brazil’s president, Bolsonaro, made a similar announcement, and later contracted COVID-19.

Independent clinical trials, including a Recovery Trial carried out in the UK on 5 June 2020, determined that there was no clinical benefit from use of hydroxychloroquine in people hospitalized with COVID-19. Patients treated with hydroxychloroquine saw a 25.7% 28-day mortality compared to a 23.5% 28-day mortality in those treated with standard care. The trial also showed that hydroxychloroquine was correlated with longer hospital stays and progression to invasive ventilation, but not with cardiac arrhythmia.

Sure, there are rogue experts, Individual, just as there are rogues in every walk of life, but all experts are not rogues.

.

.

Dear David f.,

.

You ask :

« Who would decide what issues would be subject to direct democracy? »
.

I’ve put that question on hold in the back of my head, David.

The type of issues that immediately come to mind are all and any highly controversial issues, of course, important societal matters as well as any others that affect the lives, security and well-being of our citizens, the structure and workings of our institutions, including the establishment of a new constitution to replace our old colonial constitution and the question as to whether we wish to maintain our current statute as a Constitutional Monarchy or establish Australia as a Republic, etc.

Obviously, we couldn’t expect people to vote more than three or four times a year on important issues that require detailed examination and could prove to be quite complex and time absorbing.

From a political point of view, I imagine some sort of commission composed of parliamentary representatives of the major political parties would have to be set up to formulate proposed new legislation to be submitted to the vote by direct democracy.

Those are my few initial thoughts on the question, but I would welcome your input, David, if you have any suggestions to make.

In fact, I would welcome suggestions from all and sundry here on this OLO forum. Anybody reading this, please feel free to respond

.

Dear Banjo,

One issue I think is of great importance is that of sending Australian troops into combat. As it is now the prime minister can do that on his own with not even a parliamentary discussion.

Unless Australia is attacked, there is a domestic insurrection or a treaty obligation I don't think troops should be sent into combat without a vote of the Australian public.

At the moment arms transfers are approved by the Department of Defense (euphemism for military) and are commercial-in-confidence (That means these approvals can be hidden from the public.) I think such arms transfers must be approved by a vote unless Australia is at war.

.

Dear David f.,

.

Many thanks for your suggestions, David. They certainly make sense to me and are worth serious consideration and investigation of best practise in all other developed countries throughout the world.

.

.

To all and sundry,

.

David Hetherington of the think tank, Per Capita, just published an interesting article entitled “Democracy is an endangered species”. Here is an excerpt (my selection) :
.

« Democracy is an endangered species. What was recently the world’s dominant political model risks becoming a curio by mid-century. Authoritarian rule, with populist and nationalist flavours, will likely define our children’s futures.

If that sounds like hyperbole, take a quick survey. Sure, China and Russia have only ever paid lip service to democratic rights, but Presidents Xi and Putin have both effectively designated themselves leaders for life, removing any pretence of popular sovereignty. More worryingly, countries that embraced democracy not twenty years ago are now ruled by authoritarian strongmen: Brazil, Turkey, the Philippines, Hungary, and to a lesser extent, India and Poland. These are not tin-pot dictatorships, but significant regional powers.

Most frightening is what has happened to the United States and Britain. After victory in WWII, these two nations entrenched democracy across the West and when Soviet communism fell in 1989, they worked to extend it worldwide. As recently as 2003, the US invaded Iraq on the pretence of embedding democracy.

That lip service has long gone. The US is no longer interested in advancing democracy but Making America Great Again. Its democratic institutions are faltering. President Trump uses the military to clear protesters for a photo-op. Joe Biden seriously countenances using the military to remove Trump from the White House, should Biden win the election. All this, to say nothing of the attacks on media and the courts, nepotism and strategic voter exclusion that are now daily fare in the White House.

Britain is experiencing similar dynamics. Boris Johnson asserts in the face of all evidence that the UK’s coronavirus response is “world beating”. The Dominic Cummings episode highlights how political figures are above the rules they set for everyone else. Brexit was secured on the indisputable lie that the NHS would save £350 million a week.

.

(Continued …)

.

.

(Continued …)

.

« So that leaves Western Europe, Japan, Canada, Australia and New Zealand as mature, functioning democracies. Mexico, South Africa and South Korea are more recent additions to the fold. If any of these slides into autocracy, global democracy will be sidelined even further.

…

At present, Australians take for granted that democracy will remain a force in the world. But we are like the frog in a boiling pot – unaware before it’s too late. The risk is that our major allies’ democratic commitment is fading, leaving fewer voices to champion rule of law and universal human rights. We see this fading commitment when the United States sanctions officials of the International Criminal Court (ICC) for investigating war crimes in Afghanistan, or Britain’s government seeks to prorogue Parliament in defiance of its courts.

Currently, Australia is walking a fine line, observing some democratic norms and ignoring others. Internationally, we’ve been true to our values by suggesting safe havens for Hong Kong residents fleeing Beijing’s crackdown. On the other hand, we’ve tried to prevent the ICC investigating war crimes in Palestine. We’ve largely maintained free and fair elections and judicial independence, but when the prosecutorial pursuit of a journalist is more vigorous than, say, a Cabinet Minister, we should heed the warning signs. Democracy is in a fragile state – don’t take it for granted »

.

don’t take it for granted
Banjo Paterson,
Perhaps COVID-19 will eventually help in that regard ? I know that a National Service definitely would !

Dear Banjo Paterson,

I think separation of state and religion are necessary for democracy. Neither state nor religion should use each other to advance its agenda. Religion and religious schools should be financed solely by its communicants, and a public school system which may teach comparative religion in an objective fashion should be open to all. Chaplains should be available for prisoners, soldiers or others who are located by the government away from their homes, but that should be the limit of government involvement with religion. In addition to chaplains there should be non-religious councilors available. Businesses operated by religious entities should be subject to the same taxes and regulations as other businesses.

I regard the use of the military or police to remove a defeated occupant of the White House who refuses to leave as a democratic measure.

" ....I don't think troops should be sent into combat without a vote of the Australian public."

Only a formless Green could come up with something as nutty as that. The Australian public is barely able to get by without the government telling them what to do and providing them with handouts.

I don't think troops should be sent into combat without a vote of the Australian public.
david f,
How then do you propose defending Australia could be achieved when it's painfully obvious that the snowflakes would never lift a finger to help those who provide them with their existence ?
The majority aren'r smart & physically fit enough to contribute now let alone when the Nation needs defending !

Individual wrote:

David F, I don't think troops should be sent into combat without a vote of the Australian public.

david f,
"How then do you propose defending Australia could be achieved when it's painfully obvious that the snowflakes would never lift a finger to help those who provide them with their existence ?
The majority aren'r smart & physically fit enough to contribute now let alone when the Nation needs defending !"

Dear individual,

I propose defending Australia the way it is done now - by our armed forces. I think the Australian public should have a voice in whether those armed forces are employed.

Australia has been involved in many wars since federation - Second Boer War, Boxer Rebellion, WW1, Armenian–Azerbaijani War, WW2, Indonesian National Revolution, Korean War, Malay Emergency, Borneo Confrontation, Vietnam War, Gulf War, War in Afghanistan, Operation Astute and the War on Isil. That adds up to 15 wars. With the exception of the Gulf War and the War on Isil, Australians have been killed in all the wars. I assume Australian forces have killed people in all the wars, but those who fight a war are usually better at keeping track of their own casualties than casualties on the other side. Those killed on either side are mourned.

In my view Australian participation in WW2, the Korean War, the Indonesian Confrontation, Operation Astute and the War on Isil were justified but not the other wars. Others will disagree with me. However, I think few, if any Australians, will examine the wars since Federation and contend they all were justified. If the Australian public had a voice in whether to be at war I believe Australia would not have been in so many wars.

david f,

Yes, in principle our political system is free and open but in reality those who make it to the upper echelons form themselves into a social group that has greater access to power and wealth vis-a-vis the hoi polloi.

The good thing is that we got rid of autocratic rulers who actually convinced themselves that they were closer to God than the people they ruled over.

Now that Australia is an Asian nation-state we might just see an Asian despot as our leader in the not too distant future. Especially if our Asianess becomes predominantly Chinese, which I still think it will.

I am happy to be living in Australia. And I am happy
with the way things are run in this country. I am
satisfied with the restraints on government power.
That there are institutional checks on the power of the
state. That these restraints, expressed in widely
shared norms and values, have set limits that public
officials dare not violate. These underlying assumptions
about the "rules of the game"are invisible but vital
part of any democratic system.

In our society there is a general consensus on basic
values and a widespread commitment to en existing
political order.

We have a tolerance of criticism and of dissenting opinions
which is fundamental in democracy. We do have access to
information so that we are able to make informed choices.

Above all we have a diffusion of power - by having it
to regional, local, state, and federal governments.
And this system provides checks and balances and ensures
that each group must take account of the others.

All in all - we have done well over all these years.
Hopefully this will continue. Of course there is room for
improvement. Mistakes are made - but we are doing better
than many other countries on this globe. And we are happier
than most.

Australians have been killed in all the wars
david f,
Yes, I'd imagine most of them would be turning in their graves if they could see how appreciated their sacrifice is now by those who don't even like the notion of doing a stint in learning how to be responsible for the good of all !
We need Defence because of others desiring what we have got & not of who we are !
The more we can usefully engage in the case of conflict, the better a chance we have !
After all, when conflicts are over & lives have been sacrificed those who didn't help are the first to demand equal rights !

I agree with David's suggestion that the public
should be able to vote on whether our country
goes to war.

There is no explicit statement in the Constitution
setting out specifically who should commit Australia to war.

This needs to be updated and finding it requires the
context of understanding that our Constitution is a
documents formed in the 19th century according to British
conventions and practices.

It can clearly be modified to allow the public to have a
say on our involvement on war.

Foxy,

In your dreams.

This is not Athens 435 BC.

Dear Mr Opinion,

In ancient Athens women, slaves and foreigners were denied the vote. A person could be considered a foreigner even if his or her ancestors had been in Athens for generations. Modern Australia does not have slaves, women have the vote and immigrants may become citizens. Socrates was condemned to death for impiety to the gods. A person's religious beliefs are not the business of government in Australia. Australia has a far better democracy than ancient Athens, and it would be even better if the entire population could make decisions as to war and peace. Many of those Australians who lost their lives in senseless wars would have not lost their lives in those wars if Australia had avoided those wars. In ancient Athens many prisoners of war were condemned to work in the salt mines where they rarely lived a year. Australia treats its prisoners of war far more humanely than did ancient Athens. Some of those prisoners of war even became Australians after the conflict. You are right. Australia is not ancient Athens. It is far more decent and fair.

david f,

You missed the point I was making.

No need to give me a lecture in ancient history because I'm an Arts grad. Save it for the likes of Phil and Foxy.

Dear Mr Opinion,

I didn't miss anything.

david f,

Yes you did.

Mr Opinion,

You in discussions keep stating your "qualifications".
That means that you are arguing from memory.
Not from understanding.

There is no explicit statement in the Constitution
setting out specifically who should commit Australia to war.
Foxy,
Nor does it explicitly say that occupants of the Nation can choose not to put in an effort but have every right to demand others support them !

Foxy,

What a childish thing to say.

Individual,

Some Australians have been doing that since they
first landed in this country, unfortunately.
And some of their descendants have continued
with that sort of attitude. It's a cultural thing
for some of them. Luckily, we're not all like that.
Yay!

.

To all and sundry,

.

The recent 2020 Lowy Poll revealed that a mere 25% of young Australians aged 18–29 see the US-Australia alliance as “very important”. This is a stark contrast to the 43% across all age brackets with such high regard for the alliance.

According to the report :

« This generation does not harbour greater “anti-US sentiment” – it simply has no experience where Washington behaved as a great power or even a helpful ally.

The United States has failed to address its role in climate change over decades, and will likely continue to fail, even with what seems like a likely Joe Biden victory and Democratic sweep of the Senate come November. The same can be said of other more progressive causes such as achieving racial justice or reducing US foreign adventurism – leaving a United States out of step with the aspirations of this generation.

When asked directly about Australian bilateral relations with China and the US, 55% of people aged 18–29 were in favour of building relations with China, even if it harms our relationship with the United States. This is in contrast to the overall result which saw 50% in favour of the US, even if it damages relations with China.

Not only are millennials shifting away from the US, but they also increasingly trust Asian leaders over their own.

Among millennials, 35% have “some confidence” in India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi, whereas only 34% have “some confidence” in Morrison. 28% of millennials have “some confidence” in China’s President Xi Jinping and 34% in Indonesia’s President Joko Widodo.

On individual leaders, while New Zealand’s Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern is the most trusted to do the right thing regarding world affairs among all age groups, Japan’s Prime Minister Shinzo Abe ranks second for millennials »
.

A pretty rough wake-up call, really.

But, don’t worry. She’ll be right, mate !

We’re doing fine !

.

The recent 2020 Lowy Poll revealed that a mere 25% of young Australians aged 18–29 see the US-Australia alliance as “very important”.
Banjo Paterson,
No surprise whatsoever because without doubt the poll was taken on Uni campus not out in the everyday work places !

Indy, are young people at university your most despised group in society, or are public servants more hated than them. Imagine a young university graduate working as a public servant, a hanging offence no less.

your most despised group in society,
Paul1405,
Why are you so vehement about being wrong ? They're not despised, they're simply overpaid for the effort many put in & people like yourself are doing their darnest not see that inequality changed for the good of all ! You're one of the rare ones that put themselves & deliberately up front to despising !
If you think I want to write this then you're again wrong, I do it literally against my will in the hope it might wake you up to become a more compatible member of society instead of being a constant disruptor !

Actually the Lowy Institute polls take a fairly
representative slice of the population. Their
surveys are considered reputable and are highly
respected. Also as an aside - it should be noted
that many university students do work and exist
in the "real world" as well as studying on campus.
They don't live in a bubble. As some here seem to
think they do. Perhaps some people need to get out
more often into the "real world" themselves.

.

Dear Individual,

.

You wrote :

« No surprise whatsoever because without doubt the poll was taken on Uni campus not out in the everyday work places ! »
.

Could be, Individual, but don’t look behind. They’ve already gone past us.

They’re our future leaders.

Won't be long now.

.

As an American I am appalled by the actions of the present administration of the USA in reversing the Obama regulations to counter climate change and pollution, to resign from international treaties such as JCPOA with Iran, to get out of jurisdiction of international organisations such as ICC and WHO, to blur the separation of state and religion called for in a present day democracy, to deny the rights of women and people with non-binary sexuality, to use the power of the pardon to favour political allies and supporters and to alienate allies while catering to authoritarian rulers. The present administration of the USA disregards the nation's past role as a beacon of freedom, democracy and international cooperation. Uni students in Australia are spot on in recognising the nature of the current US government. Unless it changes its current course Australia should have as little to with it as possible.

david f,
The way I see the show evolving there is that in Trump, the Us got the first POTUS who stood up against the wastes that became the norm over the decades. He is also the first to be faced with the potential of a Broke America due to recent poor administration & even more incomptence fuelled by corrupt Bureaucracy.
He is the first with the sense to put his foot down to put a stop to the rorts & by doing so has put a real dent into the indoctrination tactics of the Progressives. That's why they dispise him so much & behave so dirty about him.
He's doing a right thing by telling the World & it's largest hanger-on, the UN, to do their own policing at their own expense for a change !
Morrison & Frydenberg are doing similarly here ! The hangers-on have caused way too much harm to the Nation, time to curb their doings !

Dear individual.

The way I see it Trump revels in corruption. He has appointed cabinet ministers which are creatures of the lobbies such as his minister of the interior. He has appointed De Vos who would destroy the US public school system in her diversion of funds to religious schools as Secretary of Education. He is a scoundrel exacerbating racial and religious tension. He has has troops tear gas peaceful protestors so he could have a photo opportunity holding a Bible. He has a history of corruption as a real estate developer. He has signed contracts with subcontractors and then offered part payment with the alternative of law suits.

The progressives stand for a freer and fairer America as against those who would preserve the legacy of the Confederate slavocracy that rose in rebellion against the US. He is against the progressives and for the regressives. He wants to keep the statues commemorating the slavocracy.

The UN is an attempt to create a world of law where nations discuss their differences rather than war against each other. It is not perfect and can certainly be made better. Rather than make it better he would destroy it.

King Midas turned everything he touched to gold, Trump turns everything he touches to something that doesn't smell very good. He stinks to high heaven.

I think we disagree profoundly.

david f,
I see what see & you see what you wan to see.
I admit that Trump would be better off letting others do the talking & do what he does best, get rid of deadwood on the road to economic recovery. The progressives are exactly the opposite ! They'd be better off letting others do the doing & just do what they're good at, talking !
Every time we have a Govt, the Opposition which got voted out because of under performance, suddenly knows how to efficiently run the Nation ! The proof is in the past several progressive Govts all over the World that managing is not their strong point, talking & disrupting is !
I cringe by listening to Trump but I shiver when I listen to the Democrats. The same happens in Australia now with a Conservative Govt & a Labor opposition. I still shudder to think what it'd be like right now with Shorten at the helm.
Morrison is doing a pretty good job thus far even though 50 % of his efforts are spent on sorting out years of Labor malfunction & ongoing sabotage by the Left in general !

The progressives stand for a freer and fairer America as against those who would preserve the legacy of the Confederate slavocracy that rose in rebellion against the US. He is against the progressives and for the regressives. He wants to keep the statues commemorating the slavocracy.
david f,
That is pure last resort spiteful Academic nonsense !

.

Dear David, Dear Individual,

.

The image of the US prior to Trump was that it was a highly respectable free, democratic, peace-loving and generous nation.

Lots of other nations around the world took undue profit of that generosity, including some of its close neighbours, Europe, Israel, and China to name just a few. In addition, The US has played a leading role in important international organisations such as NATO, WHO, and the World Bank which all contribute to the maintenance of stability around the world.

The Larry Finks, Mark Zuckerbergs, Larry Pages, Jeff Besoses, Abigail Johnsons, Bill Gates, Rockefellers, Billy Grahams, and others were all there, but until Trump’s stunning election to the presidency in 2017 none of that elite clique had ever held the helm of the nation.

A new order has been introduced throughout the world since Trump’s election : every man for himself and the law of the jungle.

Trump has put a stop to what he sees as the domestic and international profiteering of the generosity of the American nation. In doing so, he has ruined the health and lives of much of poor America and allowed the immensely rich to become even richer.

On the international scene, he has transformed the atmosphere of what were previously amicable relations and negotiations by installing a climate of hostility and distrust.

His betrayal of the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), the mixed Christian-Muslim force that had served as NATO’s anti-ISIS fighting force in Syria, sent an alarm bell ringing for all those nations (including Australia) that had been counting heavily on the US for their defence to hear loud and clear.

On top of all that, Trump’s management of the COVD 19 pandemic in the US has been catastrophic to say the least.

Instead of making America Great Again, he has torn it apart and severely tarnished its previously excellent reputation.

When all this is taken into account, his final competence assessment as president of the United States is pretty miserable.

It remains to be seen if Joe Biden can do any better.

http://www.usnews.com/news/special-reports/the-worst-presidents/articles/ranking-americas-worst-presidents

.

Banjo,

Congratulations. You have led us to the crux with your last posting - absolutely nailed it - and I'm not sure even David f could have put it better (though I very much have appreciated David's efforts to try to educate the misguided and delusional on this thread).

Absolutely nailed it, Banjo - of the mighty Trump:

"On the international scene, he has transformed the atmosphere of what were previously amicable relations and negotiations by installing a climate of hostility and distrust.

His betrayal of the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), the mixed Christian-Muslim force that had served as NATO’s anti-ISIS fighting force in Syria, sent an alarm bell ringing for all those nations (including Australia) that had been counting heavily on the US for their defence to hear loud and clear.

On top of all that, Trump’s management of the COVD 19 pandemic in the US has been catastrophic to say the least.

Instead of making America Great Again, he has torn it apart and severely tarnished its previously excellent reputation.

When all this is taken into account, his final competence assessment as president of the United States is pretty miserable.

It remains to be seen if Joe Biden can do any better."

And, I would only add to your spot-on litany of Trump's notable 'betrayals', his so-called 'Peace Agreement' with the Taliban in Afghanistan - which has obviously pleased them greatly, as they (the Taliban) continue unabated in their merciless pursuits against a notionally US-invested (but nonetheless legitimate) national Afghan government, and against any non-Sharia indoctrinates in the Afghan populace.
Horror, show your face!

he has torn it apart and severely tarnished its previously excellent reputation.
Banjo Paterson,
I can't help thinking that that is the insidious work of the Democrats' incessant attack on everything he does. Imagine for just one moment the economic impact of the sabotage by his opposition who, let's face it, hadn't done an ounce better when in power before him.
What it really boils down to & the same applies here in Australia is not the rich becoming richer but the unproductive but costly bureaucracy of he Public Service protecting it's bandwagon !
The rich at least employ people, what do the Bureaucrats do ? They just grab every Dollar they can & stash it in the Super accounts. Most rich run enterprises, what do bureaucrats run ? Rorts !
This is why they & the Media are so vicious on conservative agencies ! They don't like the prospect of their Hen that lays the golden eggs needing to be fed by themselves !
The economic mess the whole world is in is due to progressive politics & bureaucracy !

Banjo, old mate,

I forgot to also mention the Big T's contribution to the 'Palestinian Peace Process' - recognizing Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and moving the US Embassy there. Such grandeur, such counter-intuitive posturing.

Bill Clinton the only one who made real progress in that regard (though Jimmy Carter had a good go), - and seeing Yasser Arafat and Yitzhak Rabin shaking hands to seal the agreement they (and Shimon Peres and Mahmoud Abbas) had reached was a truly historic moment - but unfortunately their agreement could not be borne to fruition, with the assassination later of Rabin, and the changes following.

Of their agreement, Arafat said “The battle for peace is the most difficult battle of our lives. It deserves our utmost efforts because the land of peace yearns for a just and comprehensive peace.”

"In October 1994, Arafat, Yitzhak Rabin, and Shimon Peres were jointly awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for their efforts at reconciliation."

Then: "In September 1995, Rabin, Arafat, and Peres signed a peace agreement providing for the expansion of Palestinian self-rule in the West Bank and for democratic elections to determine the leadership of the Palestinian Authority. Just over a month later, on November 4, 1995, Rabin was assassinated by a Jewish extremist at a peace rally in Tel Aviv."

Then, George W Bush and Dick Cheney, 9/11, Benjamin Netanyahu, and it's all over red rover. War, goddamned War. And, a mess ever since.

"When will they ever learn, when will they ever learn" - Peter, Paul and Mary?
Nuff said for now.

Indi-1,
You leave me speechless with your incessant drivel.

Dear Banjo and Saltpetre,

I watched the SBS documentary on Trump last night.
I was horrified by the divisiveness that the man
has caused his country - which continues to this
day. It's all about power with him. He doesn't care
for anything except himself. We lived and worked in
the US for close to ten years. And seeing what this man
is doing to his country is horrific.

He needs to go. The sooner the better.

My grandfather was a member of the Republican Party of the United States when it was regarded as the Grand Old Party that saved the Union and freed the slaves. He died before Nixon's Southern Strategy which appealed to the White South and Trump's defense of keeping statues of those who fought for the slavocracy. The Democratic Party used to be an alliance of corrupt metropolitan political machines and a racist south. The corrupt metropolitan political machines have lost their effectiveness. Tammany and the like have now disappeared, and the heirs to the slavocracy are now Republicans. My grandfather died in 1943, but he had left the Republican Party before then. John Brown who died as a traitor is buried on his farm in North Elba not far from my grandfather's home in Lake Placid. Robert E. Lee who became a far greater traitor presided at his execution. Robert E. Lee died, an honoured man. Go figure. John Brown unlike many Abolitionists believed black people were socially and intellectually equal to white people. He had no schemes for sending black people back to Africa if they were freed. He thought blacks could simply take their rightful place in US society. He was a man ahead of his time and perhaps our time.

Hi David,

Wow, John Brown's grave ! What a good man !

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Brown_(abolitionist)

Are there still any good, honest, incredibly brave people amongst us like him ?

Now, having thrown that cat amongst the vultures, watch the frenzy from the crazed Right.

Thanks, David. You must be justifiably proud :)

Best wishes,

Joe

Dear Joe,

I'm sure that there are many good people on both sides
of politics. The late John McCain comes to mind. As
does former US President Barack Obama. But I'm sure there's
many more. We just don't hear about them here.

cont'd ...

I just thought of another one - Mitt Romney.
He voted to impeach Trump. I think it was
a first for a Senator to vote to impeach a
US President from his own party.

When one thinks of Pat Robertson, Robert Falwell, Billy Graham and other ministers who suck up to the powers that be one might forget the great Christians in American history.

Roger Williams

“Williams believed that preventing error in religion was impossible, for it required people to interpret God’s law, and people would inevitably err. He therefore concluded that government must remove itself from anything that touched upon human beings’ relationship with God. A society built on the principles Massachusetts espoused would lead at best to hypocrisy, because forced worship, he wrote, ‘stincks [sic] in God’s nostrils.’ At worst, such a society would lead to a foul corruption—not of the state, which was already corrupt, but of the church,” Barry wrote.

As a result of his opinions, Williams was banished from the Massachusetts Bay Colony within a few years. He chose to found a more tolerant, religiously free colony at Providence in what is now the state of Rhode Island. Williams was thus a pioneer for the idea of church-state separation and a Founding Father more than 100 years before the generation of George Washington and Thomas Jefferson. He was possibly also the first Abolitionist. He went as a missionary to the Indians but quit when he felt he had nothing to teach them.

The Bible bashers who get upset by secularism might realise that it was invented by a Baptist minister.

Wm Penn who I think headed the only colony that lived in peace with the Indians.

John Brown

Martin Luther King jr

I'm surprised Steve Backshall hasn't featured Nancy Pelosi on Deadly 60 yet !

.

Dear Individual,

.

You wrote :

1. « he [Trump] has torn it [America] apart and severely tarnished its previously excellent reputation.

Banjo Paterson,

I can't help thinking that that is the insidious work of the Democrats' incessant attack on everything he does »
.

That’s a chicken and egg conundrum, Individual. As often, the truth is probably to be found somewhere between the two hypotheses. They are both to blame to a certain extent.

Nevertheless, the president of the United States has to assume overall responsibility. It is his job to do whatever is necessary to bring the country together and install harmonious relations within and among all the vital forces of the nation, however great the divergence of their ideologies and objectives.
.

2. « What it really boils down to & the same applies here in Australia is not the rich becoming richer but the unproductive but costly bureaucracy of he Public Service protecting it's bandwagon !

The rich at least employ people, what do the Bureaucrats do ? »
.

Your comment refers to my statement that “he [Trump] has ruined the health and lives of much of poor America and allowed the immensely rich to become even richer”.

“All men are born equal” so the saying goes, but I don’t think that is true. I see all individuals as unequal from the cradle to the grave. What happens before and after that is a matter of conjecture.

The aim of democracy, as I understand it, is not to treat all individuals equally, but fairly – to each his due. Some are smarter than others, work harder, are luckier, more talented, better trained, born with a silver spoon in their mouth, more inventive, more opportunistic, self-confident, risk receptive, megalomaniac, etc.

It seems fair to me that individuals who are more productive than others receive a just reward for their achievements. However, I do not think it is fair that the already immensely rich become even richer while the poor become poorer.

.

(Continued …)

.

.

(Continued …)

.

Likewise, there can be no justice without rule and order. The state is there for that. Somebody has to administer the affairs of the state. The so-called bureaucrats or civil servants are there for that. The state cannot function without them.

Bureaucrats are not entrepreneurs. They are employees – just like all other employees – except that their employer is the state, not some private company or individual.

If, as you suggest, they are too numerous, too expensive, too profiteering, too ineffective, incompetent, obstructive, or counter-productive, it’s not their fault. It’s the fault of the government agencies that employ them and, ultimately, the fault of the government itself.

It’s poor management and waste of public funds, i.e., our hard-earned tax money, thrown out the window.

Of course, maintaining them on the payroll could also be a delusive means of hiding an excessively high unemployment rate – which is not good for whatever political party happens to be in power.

.

Banjo Paterson,
I have never really objected to employing the unemployables however, they should not roam the halls of Govt offices nor should they be on above award Govt salaries !
Why is it not so ? You'll need to ask the Public Service Unions & other unions that pushed wages to unaffordable levels.
Maybe they thought they were doing a good thing but it all ended in a bad unaffordable situation !
We could have a Civil national Service for people who don't manage to meet any criteria other than menial work. Such a scheme could be implemented by having such people work for minimum wage for Councils who could be compensated by Centrelink. Anyone proving more capable or indeed, more actively inclined will score a wage rise.
It's all about initiative not only by people but also by officialdom. Effort needs to be rewarde, it's as simple as that. Those bureaucrats not doing their job & just putting up hurdles for everyone need to be randomely appraised & dealt with accordingly. Which Union & which Civil liberties Group would approve of such a scheme ?

.

Dear Individual,

.

You wrote :

« … they [public servants] should not roam the halls of Govt offices nor should they be on above award Govt salaries !

« … the Public Service Unions & other unions … pushed [public servants’] wages to unaffordable levels »
.

As I indicated in my previous post, Individual, that is a problem for the management of the government agencies that employ them to sort out if it is within their authority. If it is political it is beyond their authority. The government alone takes the political decisions.

If you do not agree with the government’s decisions (or laisser-faire policies), your only recourse is through your vote at election time. That’s the way democracy works.

It can be quite frustrating at times, particularly as this is just one factor that could determine your vote – and even if it did, there is no guarantee a change of government would change anything so far as this particular issue is concerned.

It's a handy and discreet political tool for regulating the unemployment rate – appreciated by political parties on both right and left.

Personally, I see greater injustice in the immensely rich accumulating huge fortunes without lifting a single finger, just because the share price and interest rates of their investments increase regularly, year after year, despite the swings and roundabouts and volatility of the markets.

The public servants’ “above award Govt salaries” and “wages pushed to unaffordable levels” are a mere pittance compared to the billions being raked in every year by the immensely rich – not because they do any work at all, or employ anybody, but simply because of their investments on the stock exchanges and other lucrative markets.

.

your only recourse is through your vote at election time. That’s the way democracy works.
Banjo Paterson,
It's been done at every election & no matter which Govt we get, the Public Service is always Labor & that's why we can never have what you call a democratic process !
Unions dictate & they're far from what could safely be called Democracy !
The only way to achieve a democratic process in Australia would be for no Public Servants allowed to vote !
We might even get a Flat Tax then !

.

Dear Individual,

.

You wrote :

« … no matter which Govt we get, the Public Service is always Labor & that's why we can never have what you call a democratic process ! »
.

There are almost two million local, state, and federal public servants in Australia, Individual, and I am not aware of any evidence, statistics etc., indicating that “the Public Service is always Labor”. If you have any, perhaps you would be kind enough to share them with me.

What I do know is that the Australian Public Service (APS) serves the government of the day which, since 2013, has always been and continues to be, the Liberal-National Coalition. Our chief mandarin (the most senior public servant in the administration of Government in Australia) is Phil Gaetjens who was appointed Secretary of the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet in 2019 by Scott Morrison.

Gaetjens had previously occupied various governmental positions for more than 40 years. He was Chief of Staff to Treasurer Peter Costello under the Howard government.

The Public Service Act 1999 clearly establishes an “apolitical and professional public service” in Australia. This was upheld in an important High Court decision in 2018 where an employee of the Department of Immigration and Citizenship used her Twitter account to post anonymous “tweets” critical of the Department. The Department terminated her employment under s15 of the Public Service Act 1999 on the basis that she used social media in breach of ss13(1), 13(7) and 13(11) of Australian Public Service Code of Conduct.

The Court concluded that :

• The fact that Banerji (the employee) tweeted anonymously was not relevant, as the communications could later lose their anonymity

• Even if the communications remained anonymous, they could still damage the reputation of the public service and,

• The implied freedom of political communication was not a mandatory consideration in deciding the appropriate disciplinary action to be taken – the implied freedom only prevents the legislature from passing statutes that unduly impinge on the public’s right to communicate freely about political matters.

.

(Continued …)

.

.

(Continued …)

.

In short, the High Court placed greater weight on the Federal Government’s ability to rely on an apolitical and effective public service than a single public servant’s perceived ‘right’ to freedom of speech.

For government employers, this case reinforces their capacity to control their employees’ expression of political views and take appropriate disciplinary action, including termination of employment, where such views are harshly critical of the public sector and the government.

This will still be the case where such views are expressed anonymously. For public sector employees, this is an opportune reminder about the perils of airing one’s political views in public.

.

Individual wrote: “What it really boils down to & the same applies here in Australia is not the rich becoming richer but the unproductive but costly bureaucracy of he Public Service protecting it's bandwagon !”

The above is nonsense.

I do not understand the animus against people employed in government jobs. The fact is that one is part of a bureaucracy whether one works for a government agency or a private corporation. As part of a bureaucracy a person has an assigned function. I have worked for both private corporations and government as a technical person. In both situations I was answerable to someone above me as I was neither the CEO nor a political appointee heading a department. I did not feel that I was essentially in a different situation whether I worked for government or in private industry. In both cases there were people who performed their function to the best of their ability. In both cases there were heads of departments who made their departments into little empires. In both cases some got by doing as little as possible. Governments must pay salaries comparable to those of private industry if government wants to get employees with similar levels of competence with those doing approximately the same function as a person in private industry.

As employees of a private corporation organise in unions to protect themselves against the demands of the bureaucracy they find themselves part of government employees organise themselves in unions for the same purpose. I was pretty much the same whether I worked for the government or worked for a corporation. In any bureaucracy, government or corporate, there is an amount of deadwood. I have never heard of any evidence to show that the proportion of deadwood is different in the two situations.

The above is nonsense.
david f,
You call it nonsense, non-bureaucrat/academic call it close to the bone !

david f,
In conversations with Public Servants it is painfully obvious that by far the greater percentage defend Labor & malign the Coalition which to me is evidence of the Public Service being Labor orientated ! I even had a Health Union President & Health bureaurcrat tell that she'll "do everything she can not to co-operate with that (Qld LNP) administraion". She still works for Qld Health !
I have taken particular notice over 38 years of Public Servants & literally 95% Labor are orientated.
So, it's no surprise no 'studies' have been done !

Dear Individual,

Is it possible that people who work for government mostly support Labor because they are concerned with the public good, and they think Labor is also concerned with the public good more than the Coalition? The Coalition must also be concerned with the welfare of the general public to a degree or they would be voted out of office. However, the Coalition serves the interests of the big end of town to a greater degree than Labor.

We live in a capitalistic society, and the interests of capital and labor are served by both parties. The degree of that service is different in both parties

..they think Labor because they are concerned with the public good,
david f,
My experience from working alongside staunch Labor supporters is not like that at all !
I found that as long as they were ok nothing else mattered.
AsI said, that's my experience, yours obviously differs !

Dear individual,

We can make generalizations and see what we want to see. However, all Coalition supporters are not the same, all Labor supporters are not the same and all supporters of any party are not the same. Every party is going to get some things wrong if they are in power. The other parties can call them to account. In a one party system such as China there is no such accountability.

david f,

Now that Australia is an Asian nation-state maybe we should consider having a one party political system to give us the despotism to match the culture.

We can still have our Tony Abbotts, Kevin Rudds, Scott Morrisons, et al standing for election in their respective communities but they just all belong to the same party.

Misopinionated,

Are you advocating this:

"Now that Australia is an Asian nation-state maybe we should consider having a one party political system to give us the despotism to match the culture."

That would make some sense. Misdescriptions, mighty leaps of logic, and an idiotic conclusion - these are right up your alley.

Joe

Dear Opinionated,

According to John Keane democracy started in Asia.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Life_and_Death_of_Democracy

“Keane's book deals with the meaning and institutions of democracy, historical roots and its present-day trends. The starting point in Keane's history is to re-consider democracy's roots. Fifth century BCE Athens (Greece), for many the cradle of democracy, was an important stage of the development process of democracy, but certainly not its point of origin. The origins of the idea of this new way of governing stretch beyond the Peloponnesus' coasts and date back to the ancient civilizations of Syria-Mesopotamia (ca. 2500 BCE).”

Even in the Bible there is mention of Asian democracy. A democratic assemblage rejected the theocracy of Samuel’s sons, and God told Samuel to listen to the voice of the people.

Samuel 1 8:7 And the LORD said unto Samuel, Hearken unto the voice of the people in all that they say unto thee: for they have not rejected thee, but they have rejected me, that I should not reign over them.

The most populous multiparty democracy in the world is India.

The Chinese people in Hong Kong have been demonstrating for democracy.

In WW2 we fought against the one-party European, totalitarian dictatorships of Germany and Italy.

Democracy and one-party dictatorships are not unique to Europe or Asia. Both can arise and have arisen in more than one continent.

david f,

I'm sure that there a lots of examples of proto-democracy but western democracy as we know it developed from our knowledge of the Greeks and the classical world.

It was in Greece particularly Athens that people began to set themselves apart from the gods and see themselves establishing social and political action as governed by people and not by divine rule.

I cannot think of any instances of this happening prior to the Greeks.

Do you know of any?

I must have a look at his book.

Do you know what his thesis is in the book?

Misop,

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Life_and_Death_of_Democracy

Dear Joe,

Drop the "s".

LOUDmouth,

Is that a cryptic comment?

I give up. What are you trying to tell me?

Dear Joe,

Here's where you just look and reply":
" SERIOUSLY?"

Dear Foxy,

Gotcha :)

Misop,

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

You could also try:

http://books.google.com.au/books?hl=en&lr=&id=NfIYd7bjJRUC&oi=fnd&pg=PT8&dq=john+keane+civil+society&ots=SfkLUkGmNZ&sig=CjKqxZ3LawdWgj65LMSP09Ro9gQ#v=onepage&q=john%20keane%20civil%20society&f=false

I think John Keane is originally from Adelaide, or at least Australia.

Joe

Dear Mr Opinion,

You wrote: "I'm sure that there a lots of examples of proto-democracy but western democracy as we know it developed from our knowledge of the Greeks and the classical world.

It was in Greece particularly Athens that people began to set themselves apart from the gods and see themselves establishing social and political action as governed by people and not by divine rule.

I cannot think of any instances of this happening prior to the Greeks."

You are wrong: Western democracy as we know did not exist in ancient Athens. Western democracy as we know it has suffrage for all adults, freedom of religion and a path of citizenship for immigrants.

In ancient Athens women could not vote, Socrates was condemned to death for impiety to the gods and all people were not regarded as citizens even though their family had lived in Athens for many generations. Athens was just one step on the road to modern democracy.

Democracy is still evolving. The current candidate for vice-president of the Democratic Party in the USA has Indian and black ancestry. This could not have been possible a few years ago.

Andrew Yang of Chinese descent was one of the Democrats vying for the Democratic nomination for president. Either democracy or one party dictatorship can arise in any culture. It depends on the historical circumstances.

david f,

I asked if you are aware of any societies that were making a distinction between divine rule and rule by the people (demos) prior to the Greeks.

Do you?

I then asked if you knew what Keane's thesis in his book is.

Do you?

Dear Mr Opinion,

I pointed out in a previous post that people in ancient Israel rejected theocracy in favour of a democratic assembly according to the Bible. Keane's thesis is that democracy is not a static fixed form of government but is evolving through time.

Read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Life_and_Death_of_Democracy for a more complete account of Keane's thesis. Read his book.

Go and learn.

david f,

You have mentioned Socrates on a number of occasions.

Have you read any of his work?

Dear Mr Opinion,

I haven't read any of Socrates' works because he wrote nothing down. All we know of Socrates is the accounts about him in other people's works.

From https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/socrates/

"The philosopher Socrates remains, as he was in his lifetime (469–399 B.C.E.),[1] an enigma, an inscrutable individual who, despite having written nothing, is considered one of the handful of philosophers who forever changed how philosophy itself was to be conceived. All our information about him is second-hand and most of it vigorously disputed, but his trial and death at the hands of the Athenian democracy is nevertheless the founding myth of the academic discipline of philosophy, and his influence has been felt far beyond philosophy itself, and in every age. Because his life is widely considered paradigmatic not only for the philosophic life but, more generally, for how anyone ought to live, Socrates has been encumbered with the adulation and emulation normally reserved for religious figures – strange for someone who tried so hard to make others do their own thinking and for someone convicted and executed on the charge of irreverence toward the gods. Certainly he was impressive, so impressive that many others were moved to write about him, all of whom found him strange by the conventions of fifth-century Athens: in his appearance, personality, and behavior, as well as in his views and methods."

Correct. But he did leave us with the Socratic method.

I don't agree with you on the reason he was put to death. To my knowledge he was condemned because he was found guilty of corrupting the Athenian youth.

The Chinese people in Hong Kong have been demonstrating for democracy.
david f,
Are you sure it's the people of Hong Kong ? I always seem to hear references to students in relation to the riotous demonstrations !

Dear individual and Mr Opinion,

Talk to you again some time.

.

Dear Individual,

.

You wrote to david f. :

« In conversations with Public Servants it is painfully obvious that by far the greater percentage defend Labor & malign the Coalition which to me is evidence of the Public Service being Labor orientated ! I even had a Health Union President & Health bureaurcrat tell that she'll "do everything she can not to co-operate with that (Qld LNP) administraion". She still works for Qld Health !

I have taken particular notice over 38 years of Public Servants & literally 95% Labor are orientated.

So, it's no surprise no 'studies' have been done !

My experience from working alongside staunch Labor supporters is … that as long as they were ok nothing else mattered »
.

Though you have not clearly indicated it to be such, the above statement seems to imply that you worked for 38 years as a public servant in Queensland alongside colleagues – 95% of whom you estimate were Labor-orientated politically – whereas, you, yourself, were one of the minority 5% who were not Labor-oriented.

Please correct me if I have incorrectly interpreted your statement and enlighten me as to what you really mean.

Whatever the case, I note with interest, your comment that, as regards your estimation that 95% of public servants in Australia (i.e., a total of almost 2 million) are all Labor-oriented while, at the same time, admitting that “ no 'studies' have been done !”

Also, if I have correctly interpreted your statement, Individual, and given our previous exchange on the same subject, I can only conclude that your declared aversion to Labor and “lefties” is essentially, if not entirely, subjective, based on your personal experience which, of course, is not necessarily generalisable to the totality of the 2 million public servants in Australia.

.

Banjo Paterson,
If you want to query it be my guest, why not instigate a survey & get it confirmed ?
Just go & speak with Public Servants & bring up the subject of political party & presto, you'll have the confirmation !

Indy, is it true you are on a first names bases with the public servants down at your local Çentrelink' office, where you spend half your time trying to pick up extra la grasse for yourself from us taxpayers? Only two years to go and its your 50th anniversary of picking up a welfare cheque from the taxpayer. You did once say on the forum you lost your job back in 72.

Paul1405,
Being silly makes you feel intelligent, does it ? Fyi, I've never received unemployment benefits repeat, never !
I lost my work back in 74 when the Goaf started to ruin small businesses & handed the likes of you Public service jobs so that the likes of you would become a vertebrae in Labor's back bone. Normally in people it's called spine but so far as I know Tape worms don't have a spine !
Take away Public Servants from the voting booth & presto, no more Labor !

.

Dear david f., Dear Loudmouth2,

.

Thank you both for introducing me to John Keane and his two books, “Civil Society” (1998) and “The Life and Death of Democracy” (2009).

I haven’t had a chance to read either of them yet but, apparently, both have had a certain amount of success.

However, I did read the extensive review of “The Life and Death of Democracy” in Wikipedia but I can’t say I agree with many of the author’s ideas on democracy as described by the author of the review.

It seems to me, for example, that democracy, from Greek demos “the people” and kratia “power, rule”, began the moment we human beings broke away from our common ancestor with the chimpanzees about 4 to 7 million years ago. Keane seems to think it only started in the late Bronze Age (1500-1200 BC).

That’s way out, in my book.

He has obviously overlooked the fact that primeval man had no ruler, no king, no queen, no emperor, no god. He was his own master and ruled his own life.

Whereas, another Wikipedia article tells us :

« Studies of modern-day hunter-gatherers offer a glimpse into the lifestyle of small, nomadic tribes dating back almost 2 million years ago.

« With limited resources, these groups were egalitarian by nature, scraping up enough food to survive and fashioning basic shelter for all. Division of labour by gender became more pronounced with the advancement of hunting techniques, particularly for larger game.

« Along with cooking, controlled use of fire fostered societal growth through communal time around the hearth. Physiological evolution also led to changes, with the bigger brains of more recent ancestors leading to longer periods of childhood and adolescence.

.

(Continued …)

.

.

(Continued …)

.

« By the time of the Neanderthals, hunter-gatherers were displaying such “human” characteristics as burying their dead and creating ornamental objects. Homo sapiens continued fostering more complex societies. By 130,000 years ago, they were interacting with other groups based nearly 200 miles away »

http://www.history.com/topics/pre-history/hunter-gatherers

I also disagree with Keane on his vision of representative democracy. You just have to read my initial post when I created this thread and you will see the difference.

Where I do agree with Keane is that democracy is evolutive – and it still has a long way to go !

.

..democracy is evolutive – and it still has a long way to go !
Banjo Paterson,
Yep, as long as the myriad of minority groups demand AND get special dispensation at every quip & turn, Democracy is talking a step backwards.
I think this where the Socialists are getting so misguided. They actually believe there's such a thing as Democracy. What we have is a pretend Democracy in which democratic processes aren't accepted & perpetually vehemently opposed by the idealists !
Australia would be a totally different & much better nation if we had Democracy that includes a license & a term of national service before eligibility to vote !

.

Dear individual ,

.

You wrote :

« Just go & speak with Public Servants & bring up the subject of political party & presto, you'll have the confirmation ! »
.

Even if I managed to encounter 100 individual public servants and persuaded them to divulge their political preferences to me (which I assure you is, for all practical purposes, impossible), the results would be just as insignificant as yours – given that there are almost 2 million public servants spread out all over Australia.

You obviously have not done it yourself as you admitted that “no 'studies' have been done !”

You have every right to express your opinion, Individual, but your opinion is just that, an opinion, not an objective fact, or a “confirmation” of something you would like others to believe to be true.

There’s no point in discussing this any further, Individual.

I’m afraid we’ll have to leave it at that.

.

Hi Banjo,

On your reflections on John Keane's take on political evolution, you would get a real kick out of Francis Fukuyama's

"The Origins of Political Order: From Prehuman times to the French Revolution".

It came out nearly ten years ago. He's also published a follow-up volume:

"Political Order and Political Decay: From the Industrial Revolution to the Globalisation of Democracy".

The decay that he focusses on is mostly that of the US.

I have to read them again. And probably again, in five and ten years, if I'm still around :)

Cheers,

Joe

LOUDmouth,

It makes me happy to see you enjoying all the fascinating Arts things like history, sociology, anthropology, archaeology, philosophy, etc.

You would have enjoyed doing an Arts degree.

Dear Joe,

I hope we both are around in ten more years. I will be 104 then, but that is less than the age of my great-grandfather when he died.

Even if I managed to encounter 100 individual public servants and persuaded them to divulge their political preferences to me (which I assure you is, for all practical purposes, impossible)
Banjo paterson,
I HAVE done it countless times. Simply criticise a Labor Govt. & the proof will fly into your face in an instant.
When I say no studies have been done I obviously referred to official studies which obviously can't happen because the progressives would not allow it. Why not you may ask ? Answer, then why haven't they done it already ! They study everything else, except when it exposes them.

Dear Joe and David,

I hope that you both shall be around for a long,
long, time yet. And that you shall keep adding
your positivity and knowledge to this forum.

Dear Foxy,

And I certainly hope that both you and David are both around in ten and fifteen years :)

Misopinionated might have finished his degree by then.

BTT: I don't think there are any surprises that Australia trundles along, with a reasonably competent and clean system of parliaments and governments, with a clearly stratified but comparatively mobile class system, and a fairly competent bureaucracy. I don't think there are anything much in the way of secret cabals which control everything.

So it's probably about as good as it can get in the circumstances.

God, I've become a centrist !

Regards,

Joe [Foulmouth]

a centrist?

c'est triste.

.

Dear loudmouth2,

.

Many thanks for your recommendation of Francis Fukuyama’s two books, the first of which (“The Origins of Political Order”) I managed to find the full text in PDF format on the web.

Judging from the 80 pages (of a total of 517 pages) that I have read so far, Fukuyama’s vision, ideas and vision of human development are close to my own understanding. He has accomplished a considerable amount of research and reflection and I look forward to reading the complete text with pleasure.

Unfortunately, I have not had the same luck with his second book “Political Order and Political Decay”. I only managed to find an abridged Google Books version with the usual numerous missing pages.

From the few sections I was able to read, I must confess that I was a little less enthusiastic. I did not feel to be quite on the same wavelength with the author as I was with his first book. He did not seem to master his subject quite as well or have what might be considered truly original solutions to offer but, of course, that is just a first impression.

I’ll give it some thought but might end-up breaking my piggy bank and buying it.

.

https://diatreme.com.au/media/1383/drx_noosa-presentation_16-jul-2020_compressed.pdf

I wonder which Australians will get rich out of this !

I hope more experts with an academic background advise government.
david f,
Well, do you know any of them to advise the Govt on this proposal ?

https://diatreme.com.au/media/1383/drx_noosa-presentation_16-jul-2020_compressed.pdf

Do you know any who could advise Govt on silicosis, bulk storage of silicone sand sandwiched between residential lands, dredging the Endeavour river, 3 trucks with trailers going each way every hour on a country road ?
If you do know some please ask them to give Govt the right advise. Thank you !