Month: January 2015

Conservative Think Tank, IPA

The Insidious Invasion of the IPA into Australian Politics : Mirroring the Koch Bros & Murdoch in the USA

public affairs

. . or Public Apathy and 75 Ideas to Make You Shudder.

The Institute of Public Affairs is a free market right-wing think tank that is funded by some of Australia’s major companies and is closely aligned to the Liberal Party.

In April 2013 it held its 70th Birthday Bash with Rupert Murdoch as its keynote speaker. Andrew Bolt was the Master of Ceremonies. Special guests included Gina Rinehart, Cardinal George Pell and many other conservative luminaries. A special address by then opposition leader Tony Abbott was a highlight.

The IPA put forward 75 proposals for a future Abbott government to consider. They were accompanied by an article titled Be like Gough: 75 radical ideas to transform Australia and attributed to John Roskam, Chris Berg and James Paterson.

Here is a short extract:

“If he wins government, Abbott faces a clear choice. He could simply overturn one or two symbolic Gillard-era policies like the carbon tax, and govern moderately. He would not offend any interest groups. In doing so, he’d probably secure a couple of terms in office for himself and the Liberal Party. But would this be a successful government? We don’t believe so. The remorseless drift to bigger government and less freedom would not halt, and it would resume with vigor when the Coalition eventually loses office. We hope he grasps the opportunity to fundamentally reshape the political culture and stem the assault on individual liberty.”

In his speech Abbott acknowledged the Institutes input into LNP policy and took the opportunity to commit to a whole raft of big promises to radically change the culture and political landscape of Australia.

“I want to assure you,” he said, “that the Coalition will indeed repeal the carbon tax, abolish the department of climate change, and abolish the Clean Energy Fund. We will repeal Section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act, at least in its current form. We will abolish new health and environmental bureaucracies. We will deliver $1 billion in red-tape savings every year. We will develop northern Australia. We will repeal the mining tax. We will create a one-stop shop for environmental approvals. We will privatise Medibank Private. We will trim the public service and we will stop throwing good money after bad on the NBN.”

True to his word he is making a decent hole in the list. He has stopped subsidies to the car industry, eliminated (partly) Family Tax Benefits, destroyed the ABCs Australia network, abandoned poker machine reform, introduced a fee competition for Australian universities, and negotiated free trade deals with Japan, South Korea, China and India. Albeit without much detail. The NBN is now nothing like what was originally intended or needed.
It doesn’t end there. He might not have abolished the Human Rights Commission, but has cut $1.65 million from its budget. It refused to renew the position of its disability commissioner and without due process appointed one of the IPAs own in Tim Wilson as a commissioner. Attorney-General George Brandis has flagged an intention to “further reform” the HRC.

The Australian National Preventive Health Agency also went and the Food, alcohol and tobacco companies fell over with gratitude.

The IPA not content with its list of 75 has added a further 25 items for the governments consideration. They may not get them all but the big fish is the institutes desire to have all media ownership laws eliminated, for example, along with the relevant regulator, the Australian Communications and Media Authority, and requirements put in place that radio and TV broadcasts be “balanced”.

The communications minister Malcolm Turnbull is apparently considering it with the likely outcome: more concentration in Australia’s media, already the most concentrated and least diverse in the developed world. More influence for the IPA and Rupert Murdoch.
It makes you wonder just who is governing. The government or the IPA. Or it at the very least brings into question the influence lobby groups have over governments. Particularly extreme right think tanks like the IPA who seem only to exist for the benefit of big business, the rich and the privileged.

In a lifetime of following politics in this country I have never known the electorate to be in such a political malaise. A non-caring, non-knowing apathy seems to have gripped the nation. The polls tell us that a large portion of the population supports a government that is performing incompetently with a leader equally doing so.

John Howard recently said that people these days care little for ideology. He is correct. The undecided 10% that once decided elections has expanded to 20%. People just want good policy that represents the common good.

People need to remember that the isms, be it Capitalism, Socialism, Fascism, Conservatism, Liberalism or Communism are only  THEORIES! They are nothing more than words written on paper. They are not active and they do nothing. Each theory is neither good nor bad. Each theory is ultimately what the people make of them. Democracy is nothing more than a theory. Our constitution is nothing more or nothing less than what we make of it. The US Constitution and Bill of Rights have no authority . . . they are nothing more than what the American people make of them. When, because of our apathy we choose to ignore and neglect our government it is easily influenced by self-interest groups like the IPA – to serve their own purposes and there is nothing that says that those who come to manage the government must be ethical, moral, or responsible to the people.

When good people neglect their government they are then governed by lesser people. We then end up with the government we deserve.

In an article I wrote just prior to Abbott’s election I said this:

“I am in fact absolutely frightened, no petrified by the prospect that he might win and the devastation he might create with his inane personality, his reliance on lobbyists and right-wing think tanks to form policy. Also on his Catholicism and the mediocre minds of his shadow cabinet cohort”.

The 75 IPA Ideas to send a shiver down your spine. You might also consider this list from Tracking Abbott’s Wreckage.

I had intended to comment on some of the individual proposals but on reflection thought it best to allow the reader to draw his or her own conclusions and comment if they so desire. The best advice I can give is to be seated while reading. A shot of whiskey might also help.

This of course is not to say that some don’t have merit.

1 Repeal the carbon tax, and don’t replace it. It will be one thing to remove the burden of the carbon tax from the Australian economy. But if it is just replaced by another costly scheme, most of the benefits will be undone.
2 Abolish the Department of Climate Change
3 Abolish the Clean Energy Fund
4 Repeal Section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act
5 Abandon Australia’s bid for a seat on the United Nations Security Council
6 Repeal the renewable energy target
7 Return income taxing powers to the states
8 Abolish the Commonwealth Grants Commission
9 Abolish the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission
10 Withdraw from the Kyoto Protocol
11 Introduce fee competition to Australian universities
12 Repeal the National Curriculum
13 Introduce competing private secondary school curriculums
14 Abolish the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA)
15 Eliminate laws that require radio and television broadcasters to be ‘balanced’
16 Abolish television spectrum licensing and devolve spectrum management to the common law
17 End local content requirements for Australian television stations
18 Eliminate family tax benefits
19 Abandon the paid parental leave scheme
20 Means-test Medicare
21 End all corporate welfare and subsidies by closing the Department of Industry, Innovation, Science, Research and Tertiary Education
22 Introduce voluntary voting
23 End mandatory disclosures on political donations
24 End media blackout in final days of election campaigns
25 End public funding to political parties
26 Remove anti-dumping laws
27 Eliminate media ownership restrictions
28 Abolish the Foreign Investment Review Board
29 Eliminate the National Preventative Health Agency
30 Cease subsidising the car industry
31 Formalise a one-in, one-out approach to regulatory reduction
32 Rule out federal funding for 2018 Commonwealth Games
33 Deregulate the parallel importation of books
34 End preferences for Industry Super Funds in workplace relations laws
35 Legislate a cap on government spending and tax as a percentage of GDP
36 Legislate a balanced budget amendment which strictly limits the size of budget deficits and the period the federal government can be in deficit
37 Force government agencies to put all of their spending online in a searchable database
38 Repeal plain packaging for cigarettes and rule it out for all other products, including alcohol and fast food
39 Reintroduce voluntary student unionism at universities
40 Introduce a voucher scheme for secondary schools
41 Repeal the alcopops tax
42 Introduce a special economic zone in the north of Australia including:
a) Lower personal income tax for residents
b) Significantly expanded 457 Visa programs for workers
c) Encourage the construction of dams
43 Repeal the mining tax
44 Devolve environmental approvals for major projects to the states
45 Introduce a single rate of income tax with a generous tax-free threshold
46 Cut company tax to an internationally competitive rate of 25 per cent
47 Cease funding the Australia Network
48 Privatise Australia Post
49 Privatise Medibank
50 Break up the ABC and put out to tender each individual function
51 Privatise SBS
52 Reduce the size of the public service from current levels of more than 260,000 to at least the 2001 low of 212,784
53 Repeal the Fair Work Act
54 Allow individuals and employers to negotiate directly terms of employment that suit them
55 Encourage independent contracting by overturning new regulations designed to punish contractors
56 Abolish the Baby Bonus
57 Abolish the First Home Owners’ Grant
58 Allow the Northern Territory to become a state
59 Halve the size of the Coalition front bench from 32 to 16
60 Remove all remaining tariff and non-tariff barriers to international trade
61 Slash top public servant salaries to much lower international standards, like in the United States
62 End all public subsidies to sport and the arts
63 Privatise the Australian Institute of Sport
64 End all hidden protectionist measures, such as preferences for local manufacturers in government tendering
65 Abolish the Office for Film and Literature Classification
66 Rule out any government-supported or mandated internet censorship
67 Means test tertiary student loans
68 Allow people to opt out of superannuation in exchange for promising to forgo any government income support in retirement
69 Immediately halt construction of the National Broadband Network and privatise any sections that have already been built
70 End all government funded Nanny State advertising
71 Reject proposals for compulsory food and alcohol labelling
72 Privatise the CSIRO
73 Defund Harmony Day
74 Close the Office for Youth
75 Privatise the Snowy-Hydro Scheme

Really they must be in need of mental therapy. I can suggest a good practitioner.

Twitt
Filed under:
Corporate theft of Democracy

The IPA, Friedrich Hayek and the ‘socialist conservative’ — Tony Abbott

In the wacky and dangerous world of the IPA and its backers, Austrian economist Friedrich Hayek rules and people like Tony Abbott are regarded as socialists, writes Ross Jones.

On a recent balmy Sydney evening, I was comfortably set up in a pub down near the Quay — about 6pm, the heat gone from the day, the beer cold.

Better, I was with a few old friends. Better still, one was still employed by a bank and we were drinking on its tab. What could go wrong?

Well, one chap, a man I’ve known for a long time and whose professional intellect I have always respected, informed me he was a paid-up member of the Institute of Public Affairs — the IPA. Apart from spurting beer, I handled it pretty well.

It was a tough night. In some pubs you can converse at normal conversational volume, but not CBD pubs in summer. You try arguing Hayek over classic rock played loud and proud.

The writings of Austrian-born economist and Anglophile (read suck), Friedrich August von Hayek, are the intellectual spine of the IPA. FA shuffled off the mortal coil back in 1992 but, in his 93 years of life, he left an intellectual legacy rubbery enough to be abused and misused by every opportunist who cared to do so.

Margaret Thatcher was fond of silencing her opponents with pithy Hayek quote.

But there are precious few of these. Das Kapital reads like manga comic in comparison to anything written by Hayek. Have a read and I defy you to stay awake for more than five minutes.

It’s not that he was a dill — far from it; out there flawed genius is more like it. Friedrich was awarded the 1974 Nobel prize for economics.

FA’s world view was formed through the depression and WWII tough times. Forget left and right, Hayek goes way outside the box and argues planning sucks and untrammelled spontaneity rules.

In the way of all economists, Hayek created a jargonised universe which, on first reading (zzzZZZ) sort of makes sense. But when you wake up, it’s a bad dream.

There is no room for the easily-manipulated in Hayek’s world. And because the suckers cannot dance with the elite, the elite have the absolute right to dance with the suckers. FA didn’t win a Nobel Prize for f’all.

Fred’s seminal (?) work, ironically-titled, The Road to Serfdom, published in 1934, really just recorded what was already happening — which, in the early 1930s, was not good.

In this regard, Hayek can be considered more perspicacious than Keynes or Friedman. But Thomas Piketty? I think not.

In much the same way, the tiresome Hayek, who was essentially a grasping parvenu happy to justify the avarice of his admired mates, simply recorded power as he saw it, Picketty records the simple fact that economic power is accreting to a few serious families at an accelerating rate. Thomas is a best seller, FA was not.

But despite his desultory sales, limited to economics-porn bookshops, the IPA brought FA to Australia in 1976, just in time to put the heat on Fraser.

In a commentary on the great man’s visit, the IPA noted:

Nut job.

Back to the pub.

Over free beer and rock’n’roll, my drinking-buddy said of the IPA, and I paraphrase:

Our political Venn diagram and the Prime Minister’s only have a small area of overlap. He is a socialist conservative and we are not.

So there you go. The IPA consider Abbott a socialist conservative. I believe the online jargon response is FMD.

I am betting none of the IPA backers – the movers and shakers – have ever really read Hayek. That sludge-like task is best left to the troops who have the time. But they love the idea of the ideas conveyed to them by these loyals.

So, when you see Abbott smooching up to Gina, or his right arm hovering over Rupert’s buttocks, you now know both are thinking:

Socialist Conservative! Get off me! But, okay, right now you are handy.

Economics 101, with its indifference curves, optimisation and efficient resource allocation, was never more than a charming fantasy — so much so that introductory students’ first model is often Man Friday and its attending parable of labour specialisation and serfdom.

Hayek would have it Man Friday’s inability to understand the words “Get coconut” seriously impaired Robinson’s ability to harvest every coconut on the island and flog them to every pirate ship that happened by. What else can you do with people like this? Point out every coconut? They deserve a life on the beach, left only to aspire to Robbo’s pirate-built condo high on the bluff.

Robbo’s big problem was that there are seven days in the week and he only had Friday — labour shortage looming.

The IPA noted in 1976:

Apart from the ‘grand climacteric’, the existential threats to our freedom, and ‘the wider threat whole of our civilisation’ are real.

In Australia, it is called the IPA.

Filed under:
Koch Bros

9 signs the Kochs have created their own national political party – Salon.com

9 signs the Kochs have created their own national political party

 

9 signs the Kochs have created their own national political party – Salon.com.

Experts vs propaganda, Science vs Ideology

Why we need to listen to the real experts in science If we want to use scientific thinking to solve problems, we need people to appreciate evidence and heed expert advice. But the Australian suspicion of authority extends to experts, and this public cynicism…Murdoch’s commentators are neither experts nor ethicists but merely corporate and rightwing idealogues. idealogues

If we want to use scientific thinking to solve problems, we need people to appreciate evidence and heed expert advice.

But the Australian suspicion of authority extends to experts, and this public cynicism can be manipulated to shift the tone and direction of debates. We have seen this happen in arguments about climate change.

This goes beyond the tall poppy syndrome. Disregard for experts who have spent years studying critical issues is a dangerous default position. The ability of our society to make decisions in the public interest is handicapped when evidence and thoughtfully presented arguments are ignored.

So why is science not used more effectively to address critical questions? We think there are several contributing factors including the rise of Google experts and the limited skills set of scientists themselves. We think we need non-scientists to help us communicate with and serve the public better.

At a public meeting recently, when a well-informed and feisty elderly participant asked a question that referred to some research, a senior public servant replied: “Oh, everyone has a scientific study to justify their position, there is no end to the studies you could cite, I am sure, to support your point of view.”

This is a cynical statement, where there are no absolute truths and everyone’s opinion must be treated as equally valid. In this intellectual framework, the findings of science can be easily dismissed as one of many conflicting views of reality.

Such a viewpoint is dangerous from our point of view.

When scientists disagree with one another, as they must to ensure progress in their field, it is easy to argue that it is not possible to distinguish between conflicting hypotheses. But scientists always agree that critical thinking done well eventually leads to a better understanding and superior solutions. All opinions are not equal.

If you are flying in an airplane at 30,000 feet, you will not be content with just any scientific study about whether the wing will stay on the plane. Most people will want to put their trust in the calculations of an expert aeronautical engineer who understands the physics of stresses on the wing.

So why do we not want to trust experts in bushfire management, or climate change? Because most people are happier with experts whose conclusions fit their own ideas.

This encourages people to express their opinions, and the internet allows those opinions to get a wide viewing. This makes for interesting times, but not always effective solutions.

Google experts

The internet is filled with information and ideas. Everyone can quickly find “answers”, and this means that everyone is an “expert”.

But using Google to find the answer to Trivial Pursuit questions is not the same as researching a complex question. Experts do have skills and one of those is the ability to use high quality sources, up to date theoretical frameworks, and critical thinking based on their experience in a particular field. This is why an expert’s answers are going to be more accurate and more nuanced than a novice.

For example, people who use Dr Google to diagnose their symptoms before visiting an actual doctor, sometimes ask to be tested for diseases they do not have, or waste time seeking a second opinion because they are convinced that their “research” has led them to a correct diagnosis. If it were really that easy, would doctors have to spend all those years in medical school?

There is another problem called the Dunning-Kruger effect, which states that “people who lack the knowledge or wisdom to perform well are often unaware of this fact”.

In other words, people who think all answers can be found on Google are likely to be unaware of the effort involved in solving complex problems, or why years of specialist training might help.

This is almost more dangerous than complete ignorance, because unlike Donald Rumsfeld, they don’t even know what they don’t know.

Easy access to huge volumes of confusing information sits very comfortably in a post-modern world. Unfortunately, the outcome is that most people are reluctant to do the intellectual hard work of sifting through competing hypotheses. So how are we to engage in robust scientific debates in such a public arena?

Science is not enough

It has been said many times that scientists need to communicate their research more broadly. The challenges are well known – peer reviewed scientific publications are necessary for our careers and time spent engaging with the public is time away from the field, our computers and laboratory benches.

Nevertheless, if we hope to influence government policy we cannot assume that the implications of our research will be understood by those who most need to know what we are doing.

Reaching out to busy bureaucrats and politicians is not something that comes naturally to scientists. To turn science into policy we need a diverse team of people with different but complementary skills who share a commitment to the task.

Skills that are not commonly found in scientists may be found in political scientists, lawyers, sociologists, public relations companies, the arts community and the media.

Forming relationships with people who can translate our findings into something that cannot be ignored may be critical to success.

Consider what we are up against, lobby groups with deep pockets have come up with brilliant assaults on the thoughtful management of our environment.

“Cutting Green Tape” or “No fuels, no fire” – these clever bits of spin threaten decades of rigorous research and policy development. This is not a failure of science, but a triumph of imagination. We have been dramatically out-manoeuvred, shown to be amateurs, in the world of presenting competing ideas.

At a recent fire forum we learned that current policy is: “Based on science, but driven by values.” This means that despite the best evidence, the values of our current society will decide when to act. This introduces another definition of truth seeking, based on who made the best argument in a political or legal process.

Science is meant to be done dispassionately and objectively, so scientists are not well equipped to participate in debates about values. This is the realm of ethicists, philosophers, artists and theologians.

But if we are passionate about applying the lessons learned from our research, we will need marketers, lobbyists, communication experts, accountants and economists. A multi-disciplinary team is required to convince society to change.

Perhaps the people with these complementary skills will be able to help break down the anti-intellectualism we face, for the benefit of all.

Economy

Joseph Stiglitz: Thomas Piketty gets income inequality wrong.

Joseph Stiglitz: Thomas Piketty gets income inequality wrong

Joseph Stiglitz: Thomas Piketty gets income inequality wrong – Salon.com.

Political distortion revealed, Politics

Battle of the billionaires: Why liberals shouldn’t count on their rich patrons to win. Democratic Party politics is definitely not what the Murdochs, the Kochs, the Adelsons and the Foster Friesses are all about. They are attempting to dominate the political process by using their money to directly influence the ideological and political makeup of our society. From Fox News to think tanks to super PACs to political campaigns they are using their fortunes to actively change American politics.

Battle of the billionaires: Why liberals shouldn't count on their rich patrons to win

 

Battle of the billionaires: Why liberals shouldn’t count on their rich patrons to win – Salon.com.

Uncategorized

Safe, secure, affordable long term housing is one of our most basic needs – but obviously not if you live in LNP Australia and can’t afford the exorbitant rents in an inflated rental market.

SS Minister Scott Morrison

Moreland Council

It’s my prerogative: Morrison’s last despotic act as Immigration Minister

Scott Morrison (image from thenewdaily.com)

One of the last despotic acts of former Immigration Minister Scott Morrison was to threaten to revoke the power of Moreland City Council Mayor, Meghan Hopper, to perform citizenship ceremonies unless she agreed to read out his ministerial message during the ceremonies.

Moreland Council has a policy of welcoming refugees into the shire.

Ms Hopper stated: “I do not feel comfortable acting as a spokesperson when it comes to personal messages from the minister. I feel that the reading of a message from the minister in fact politicises what should be an apolitical occasion, as does threatening to remove Moreland’s ability to confer citizenship.”

The Australian Government Department of Immigration and Border Protection Australian Citizenship Ceremonies Code states: Citizenship ceremonies are non-commercial, apolitical, bipartisan and secular.They must not be used as forums for political, partisan or religious expression or for the distribution of material which could be perceived to be of a commercial, political or religious nature.

The Sydney Morning Herald article notes: According to the Department of Immigration and Border Protection, the reading of the minister’s message is not compulsory under legislation.

Despite that, Mr Morrison said in his letter to Ms Hopper that it was his “prerogative” that the message be read aloud, as it is an “integral part of the ceremony”.

As part of his response, Mr Morrison included a one-page “letter of agreement” for Ms Hopper to sign, stating that she will include the message as part of Moreland’s ceremony.

“If you fail to comply with this request by January 10 2015, I will withdraw your authority, and that of the deputy mayor and general manager, to preside at Australian citizenship ceremonies,” he said in the letter.

It is difficult to see this behaviour by Morrison as anything more than petty revenge against a Mayor and council who oppose the Abbott government’s refugee policies.

No one should be surprised at Morrison’s efforts at petty revenge. Such efforts are the hallmark of a government that has spent the majority of its time so far in office deliberately trashing previous ALP policies for no reason other than that they were ALP policies.

There is no legislation that requires any official performing citizenship ceremonies to read out a ministerial message. Regardless of the law, Morrison employed intimidatory bullying tactics to demand his speech be read in the future. This is, he claims, his “prerogative.” Note that legislation is irrelevant to this minister of the crown. What counts here is his personal “prerogative.”

As Morrison is now Minister for Social Services we can expect an ongoing disregard for legislation, and a lot more bullying on the grounds of his personal prerogatives.

A minister of the crown must uphold legislation or seek to change it. Deliberately ignoring legislation and instead attempting to impose one’s personal prerogative over and above it, is not acceptable ministerial behaviour. Ministers of the crown have a particular responsibility to respect our laws.

Morrison’s former department, when seeking extended powers for him, argued thus: The DIBA submission to a Senate committee argues that an elected member of parliament and minister of the Crown has gained a particular insight into the community’s standards and values.

The rest of us are expected to observe the laws that govern community standards and values. If an elected member of parliament and minister of the crown so conspicuously fails to do this, and instead threatens and bullies others on the sole grounds of his personal prerogative, we do not have a democratic government, we have a burgeoning dictatorship.

Fox News, Politics

Poll Finds Four Out Of Five Imbeciles Believe Obama Has ‘Destroyed America’ . Fox News the balanced opinion poll of Rupert Murdoch and his viewers.

ap7604010327

THE CABIN ANTHRAX, MURPHY, N.C. (CT&P) – A shocking new Fox News poll has revealed that approximately 80% of imbeciles living in the continental United States think that President Obama has destroyed America. The poll was taken on December 30th. Participants were randomly chosen from imbeciles currently listed on the National Idiot’s Register in Washington, D.C.

idiot-gun-6

The poll consisted of two simple statements that imbeciles were required to complete. The statements were followed by a comment section where each imbecile was given the opportunity to voice his or her views on the subject.

Participants were first given the opportunity to complete the following sentence:

President Obama has

A. not destroyed the country.

B. somewhat destroyed the country.

C. really, really destroyed the country.

D. completely and utterly destroyed the country.

Those imbeciles that answered “B,” “C,” or “D” were then asked to complete this sentence:

President Obama has destroyed the country because

A. he is black.

B. of Obamacare.

C. of Benghazi

D. he is a member of the worldwide communist conspiracy to sap and impurify our precious bodily fluids.

E. All of the above

Fox researchers found that over 80% of imbeciles polled thought that Mr. Obama had in some way ‘destroyed the country,’ with over 90% of those imbeciles answering “E” to the second question.

Paradoxically, the researchers also discovered that although imbeciles thought that the country had been destroyed, they continued to insist that it was the greatest country on earth and was humanity’s last, best hope for the future.

Monty Python

Perhaps the most revealing part of the poll was the comments section, which illustrated just ignorant imbeciles in this country are.

Billy Bob McSneed, an imbecile from Running Sore, Arkansas said: “That negra wants to give poor people medical care and let a bunch of infected foreign kids into the United States. He’s a disgrace, and it’s only a matter of time before he lets the United Nations come and get all our guns!”

Jean “Genius” Mims, an imbecile from Melanoma Beach, Florida said: “I may not be able to read, but I darn shore know destruction when I seen it, and let me tell you, this country had been destructed!”

Billy Frank McDim of Rabid Beaver, Minnesota said: “That man is downright insane. He’s bent on destroying all of us with his gay marriage and enlightened foreign policy. The next thing you know it’ll be legal to marry your goat! Everybody knows that big business and Jesus are our only hope. I just thank God every day for smart people like Michele Bachmann and Sarah Palin!”

One of the few imbeciles that thought that President Obama had not destroyed the country was Tampaxia Reynolds from Mobile, Alabama who said: “I really have not noticed that the United States has been destroyed, but maybe that’s because I don’t watch Fox News. I really don’t know.”

3% Aus, 30% incarcerated, Courage, Disenfranchisement

I’m doing white man’s time: Berrima Prison 80 % black; “living in the middle is a cross to bear” “living in the middle is a tug of war”

http://www.sbs.com.au/ondemand/video/375788611866/Prison-Songs

Education, health, values

What’s that you said? Cuba providing literacy programs in rural communities with big aboriginal populations like Wilcannia. Cuba a small socialist island and Australia a rich country in natural resources and we can’t find the wealth and resources to provide education and health for the original inhabitants of our land. It says a lot about the priorities of Capitalism and Socialism, say no more. Cuba Libre is not just a fucking drink but it is food for thought.

LNP Theft, Mark Textor

Stealing our children’s future

the-future-for-our-children-sm

Comparing government debt to putting your groceries on the credit card, which your children will have to pay for after you die, is utterly ridiculous as John Kelly has pointed out.  It is also insulting, both for its duplicity and its inference that we are all ignorant fools.

It is a theme that is repeated constantly, with Hockey even summoning a tear as he refused to burden his children with our debt.  Mind you he seems quite happy to burden the taxpayer with his debt but that’s a whole other issue.

Apparently, the millions that the Abbott government is paying to private firms to monitor the media and online opinions and to people like the odious Mark Textor to come up with slogans, has come up with “Intergenerational debt” as a winner.  Our children and our grandchildren will be paying for our profligacy.

What a load of hogwash.

What we should be doing is investing in their future but, by his own admission, Tony Abbott isn’t looking sixteen years down the track.

The Abbott government’s deal with the Palmer United Party to freeze the minimum superannuation contribution rate at 9.5% until 2021 will not only cost retirees, it will also see future governments forced to bear the brunt of an increased reliance on the Age Pension which is likely to translate to many billions of dollars in increased pension payments over future years.

Prior to the Palmer deal, the guarantee was scheduled to increase to 10% on 1 July 2015 and reach 12% on 1 July 2019. The new policy therefore represents a six-year deferral of the increases.

The negative effects of the delay in the increase in the super guarantee rate will be magnified once the Age Pension age is raised to 70 and the pension is indexed to prices rather than wages with adverse effects largest for people currently under the age of 40.

The decision to deregulate university fees, cut the government contribution, and raise the interest rate, will also badly affect young people and particularly women.

According to research done by the National Centre for Social and Economic Modelling for The Conversation and based on fees charged at the University of Canberra, pay-off times and total repayments would be significantly higher for science, nursing and teaching degrees, particularly for women.

Even without deregulation, if the university simply recouped the amount lost from the government’s reduction in funding, a female science graduate would take 5.5 years longer to pay off the cost of her degree. She would be paying it off for a total 13.9 years. Her total repayments would increase by an estimated $51,500, to $95,700.

If universities increase their fees by an extra 20 per cent, the same graduate would have the debt for 16.4 years. Her repayments would nearly triple from $44,200 to $123,000. The initial debt would double from $39,700 to $79,700.

The Greens have also done modelling on the impact of the changes that shows poorer students would be hardest hit.

A graduate with a $34,000 debt and a starting salary of $75,000 would take 20 years to pay off their debt, paying $20,000 in interest.

Other modelling has revealed that women would be further impacted because they generally take a year off to have children and work part-time for at least two years after that.

And it isn’t just the universities that are under attack.  The Government will cut $30 billion out of school funding over the next 10 years by increasing spending at a lower rate, abandoning the commitment to a properly funded needs-based aspirational system.

What they fail to understand is the importance of school education to individuals and to the productivity of our society.  It is an investment which will bring a far greater return than taking money out of circulation so you can say “look at me, I have a surplus”.

We have slashed funding for research which means the best and brightest of our children will have to go overseas to pursue careers in science and innovation with the fruits of their labours enjoyed by those with the foresight to support their endeavours.

Our children have been told they must “earn or learn” as youth unemployment rises, courses become more expensive, trades training centres are closed down, and 457 visa workers are imported.  If they find themselves unemployed they will be thrown to the wolves with no support for half of every year.

The only government strategy for dealing with youth unemployment seems to be renewed agitation for Workchoices II – strip away hard won entitlements, make them work for less, and they may find a job even if it IS “picking up garbage.”

Also under attack is the universal healthcare that we have enjoyed for over 40 years.

Not only will we have to pay more to see a doctor, increasingly, healthcare is being privatised where profit becomes the driving motive and unprofitable services become untenable.   The budget cut $50 billion from proposed hospital funding over the next ten years, ripping up the signed agreement with the states, just as they did for education funding.

Government policies allowing foreign investment and tax concessions for negative gearing and capital gains coupled with very low interest rates mean our children will struggle to buy a home.  Prices and rents have skyrocketed as investors buy up available properties.

But the biggest crime against our children is our inaction on climate change.  Worse than that, we are hugely increasing our mining and exports of fossil fuels, a move that our children and the world at large will pay dearly for.

As a parent, I had hoped that I would pass on a world in better shape than I found it.

We aren’t mortgaging our children’s future, we are stealing it.

Myths, Per Capita report

Busting myths about baby boomer burdens

Illustration: Matt Davidson.

My mum Betty is frail. She needs to use a walking frame to get from her bed to her bathroom, a few short metres away. She is 87 and now resides in an aged care facility in Croydon where she depends on the physical and practical support of myriad health care and nursing personnel. But she is not a net drain on the federal budget or the  economy. At 87 she remains a strong contributor, one among many such older Australians.

It’s high time we reframed our perceptions and prejudices about our older citizens and recognised how very much they have given – and continue to give – to our society. Here are just three myth busters worth considering when you next hear a federal government minister tell you the “age of entitlement” is over and older Australians need to pay up.

Spending per capita on the aged

Australia is one of the meanest nations when it comes to older people. The HelpAge International Global AgeWatch Index ranks OECD statistics on spending on pensions as a percentage of GDP. Our report card in the 2014 index was mixed, except on income security where we performed particularly poorly.

The index reported that “Australia has the lowest ranking (61) in its region for the income security domain, and the highest old age poverty rate in the region (35.5 per cent). It also has below average pension income coverage (83per cent) and relative welfare rates (65per cent) compared to other countries in this region.” In fact, Australia spends an average of 3.5 per cent of its GDP on age-related spending against an OECD average of 7.8 per cent, as reported by think tank Per Capita.

Challenging the dependency ratio

Dr Katharine Betts, from the Swinburne University of Technology, has analysed the population spike related to baby boomers and the related fluctuating dependency ratio in her paper “The ageing of the Australian population: triumph or disaster”. She concludes that fears that a reduction in the proportion of tax-paying workers will be unable to support a growing proportion of age pensioners are unfounded: even with no further growth in labour force participation rates, the dependency ratio is expected to decline from a current 53.6 per cent to about 44-46 per cent by 2061  – still higher than the mid-1960s of 42 per cent. “By today’s standards, the economy [then] was prosperous. Few jobs in developed countries now require muscle power and more people are completing the higher levels of education needed for white-collar and knowledge-based work,” she says.

“Moreover, the health and cognitive abilities of older people are better today than they were among older people in the past. All of these changes mean that a shortage of tax-paying workers does not have to cloud our future.”

The ruler we use

The way we measure GDP and the value added by older Australians is flawed. We see the “take” in the form of welfare, but rarely the give in the form of unpaid work, volunteering, child-minding and intergenerational transfers of wealth.

Dr Kathleen Brasher, from Council on the Ageing Victoria, tried to put some numbers on these flows of capital at a national COTA forum on ageing  last July. She values the volunteering efforts of older Australians at $74 billion per annum, and the intergenerational transfer of wealth at $53 billion.

Furthermore, in 2011 49 per cent of children aged 12 or below who were receiving childcare (including after school care) were looked after by grandparents (Australian Bureau of Statistics).

This leads us to a basic flaw in the May budget. It refuses to acknowledge the inputs of senior Australians, while berating them for becoming “leaners” rather than “lifters”. The government has continued to reel from the shock that its socially inequitable budget was roundly rejected by ordinary Australians. So the heaviest of guns – Scott Morrison – is being positioned to tame this recalcitrant populace and force through changes to welfare that will see young people on Newstart go without basic support for up to six months, a re-indexation of the age pension, which will result in $80 less per week within 10 years, according to the Australian Council of Social Services, and an increase in the official retirement age from 67 to 70, whether there is work available or not.

The only hitch to Morrison’s agenda, of course, is an increasingly unpredictable Senate crossbench.

So, back to Betty, and why I refuse to call her a drain on the public purse. Just like your mum, dad or elderly aunt, Betty first went to work in 1941. She was 14 and her dad William, a chronic asthmatic whose heart gave out, had just dropped dead in front of her. He had served as an airman in World War I, but there was no disability pension for William, and he was left to eke out a subsistence on a tiny plot in north Croydon, trying to support his wife and young daughter as his health failed.

The death of her dad meant that Mum was forced to find work as a typist in the city, involving a lengthy daily commute by horse then train. She worked at various jobs, barring a short break to have two children, until she was 60. By then, due to consistent saving and a very frugal lifestyle, she and Dad were largely self-funded in retirement.

Along the way they contributed to the university education of four grandchildren, untold hours of child-minding and similarly extensive community volunteering until their late 70s. Today it is her own savings upon which she has drawn to fund the bond and daily care fees in her new home.

So don’t let the government’s rhetoric cloud your judgment or stoke an intergenerational war that is both false and unnecessary.

Betty is just one of hundreds of thousands of older Australians who continue to pay their own way and contribute far more than they have ever received in social service payments. For 40 or 50 years they paid taxes, which built the kindergartens, schools, universities, roads and airports that subsequent generations have enjoyed. Upon retirement they gave back with countless hours of volunteer work, within the family and community, and intergenerational transfers of wealth which our GDP simply doesn’t measure.

It is high time we took stock and recognised their contribution. And spoke up to protect the meagre pension entitlements they so richly deserve.

Kaye Fallick is the publisher of http://www.yourlifechoices.com.au.

Scott Morrison

Part 3: Arise Scott Morrison, Lord Sixwords of Cronulla! – » The Australian Independent Media Network

Victory in the Lower House (image from olddogthoughts.com)

Part 3: Arise Scott Morrison, Lord Sixwords of Cronulla! – » The Australian Independent Media Network.

Scott Morrison

Part 2: Arise Scott Morrison, Lord Sixwords of Cronulla! – » The Australian Independent Media Network

Image from smh.com.au

 

Part 2: Arise Scott Morrison, Lord Sixwords of Cronulla! – » The Australian Independent Media Network.

BUK, Part 11, Ukrainian SU-25

The downing of Malaysia Airlines MH17 – Part 11

Image from globalresearch.ca

Beyond the fog (continued).

The Dutch Safety Board has put together a useful Q&A on the background to its Preliminary Report.

It says:

“The preliminary report provides an overview of the initial, provisional facts a relatively short time after the occurrence. When the report is released, not all investigation data will have been analysed and no definitive conclusions drawn. Additional investigation data, an analysis and the conclusions based thereon will be included in the final report, making it far more extensive and in-depth.”

On the question of why it will not apportion blame, it says:

“In addition to providing a clear understanding of the cause, the aim of the Dutch Safety Board’s work is to increase safety. This is achieved by investigating the causes of an incident and – if possible – making recommendations to improve safety.

This is set out as such in the International Civil Aviation Organisation agreement, which deals specifically with aviation investigations … Among other things, the I.C.A.O. agreement prescribes how aviation accidents must be investigated, and that the purpose of such investigations must be to improve safety and not to apportion blame or establish liability.”

A separate criminal investigation into the crash is being carried out by the Dutch prosecution service at The Hague, involving 10 Dutch prosecutors and 200 police officers. In this case, the criminal investigators have given no time scale as to when their investigation will be completed.

Preliminary though it is, the report deserves some comments.

For instance: satellite images are mentioned to help analyse the crash site after the disaster, but nowhere in the Report is there any mention of satellite images of missile launchers, intelligence from the United States regarding missile launches, or any information or evidence at all in any regard suggesting a missile had destroyed MH17. In fact, the Preliminary Report concludes by stating that the information available must necessarily be regarded as tentative and subject to alternation or correction if additional evidence becomes available.

With the black boxes in hand and a wealth of data from multiple sources both onboard the aircraft and from the ground in both Ukraine and Russia, the Dutch Safety Board seems still hesitant to draw any conclusions.

The Report specifically mentions information collected from Russia, including air traffic control and radar data – both of which were publicly shared by Russia in the aftermath of the disaster. The Report also cites data collected from Ukraine air traffic controllers. The United States however, apart from providing technical information about the aircraft itself considering it was manufactured in the U.S., provided absolutely no data in any regard according to the Report.

Had the American administration actually possessed any credible information to substantiate its claims that MH17 was shot down by a missile, such evidence surely could have been submitted to and included in the Dutch Safety Board’s preliminary reporting. That it is missing confirms what commentators, analysts, and politicians around the world had long since suspected: the ‘western’ premature conclusions regarding MH17’s demise were driven by a political agenda, not a factually based search for the truth. The evidence that MH17 was shot down by a missile as the ‘western’ governments insisted is missing – most likely because it never existed. That circumstance did not disturb the Australian government.

When Dutch investigators published their Preliminary Report, the ‘Western’ powers merely reiterated its original claims, simply imposing their contradictory nature upon the Report – most likely believing the public would never actually read its 34 pages. The United States and Ukraine have accused Russian forces of launching the missile, but Russia has denied the charge, pointing instead at the Ukrainian air force.

The Report came out at a time when the European Union is weighing new sanctions against Russia for its role in stoking the separatist revolt in eastern Ukraine. The nature of the sanctions were left unspecified after a meeting of E.U. ambassadors, but European diplomats had said earlier that the measures would target the Russian oil industry’s ability to raise money on European capital measures.

However, their entry into force was delayed for a ‘few days’ according to a statement from Brussels, to leave time to assess the implementation of a tenuous ceasefire agreement in Ukraine, which was subsequently negotiated.

Because of earlier fighting around the MH17 crash site, the Dutch Safety Board investigators had been unable to visit the scene, but the organisation said it had carried out an investigation based on other sources of information. It added: “Once a secure and stable situation has been established, the DSB will visit the location. This is in order to verify the results of the investigation from other sources and to conduct a specific search for wreckage and other vital pieces.”

The Dutch Safety Board preliminary findings lend themselves to two inferences: 1) the Ukraine resistance is very likely not guilty of the shoot down and 2) the insane hostilities towards Russia are based on a total misread of readily available evidence.

With all due respects to the Dutch Safety Board, they have not expanded their findings much beyond those of thirty year Lufthansa pilot Peter Haisenko. The pilot had access to a high resolution photograph off of the internet right after the crash, studied it, and concluded that: “The cockpit shows traces of shelling! You can see the entry and exit holes. The edge of a portion of the holes is bent inwards. These are the smaller holes, round and clean, showing the entry points most likely that of a 30 millimeter caliber projectile.”

There was no mention of a missile, just “high-energy objects from outside the aircraft.” That sounds like the “30 millimeter caliber projectiles” or similar projectiles fired from the cannon of a fighter aircraft. It could be something else but the photograph and finding are compelling evidence. In addition, there is no mention of a missile bringing down the aircraft.

Therefore, the resistance militias maligned with the presumption of guilt by the American administration and its chorus in the European Union and in Australia seems to be off the hook. Since the photograph that Haisenko used was published right after the crash, the resistance should have been removed from the suspect list at that time.

Despite everything else, in a statement 9 September 2014, Prime Minister Abbott said that the explanation provided by the Preliminary Report was consistent with a surface-to-air missile.

“The findings are consistent with the government’s statement that MH17 was shot down by a large surface-to-air missile.” the statement said.

More research will be necessary, the investigators said, to determine the cause with greater precision. But Mr. Abbott had no doubt.

More cautiously, Malaysian Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak said that he hoped investigators could return to the crash site in eastern Ukraine before the onset of European winter.

Malaysian investigators travelled to Donetsk in the days after the plane crash and negotiated directly with the Donetsk rebels to gain the handover of the plane’s two black boxes, which were presented to the delegation at a surreal press conference past midnight in the rebel capital.

The handover was negotiated when the Malaysian Prime Minister telephoned Donetsk’s self-declared prime minister, Alexander Borodai, a Russian citizen who has since left the government and returned to Russia.

Barely ten minutes after the crash happened ‘the West’ was told that it had been a Russian BUK system which had fired a ground to air missile to the plane. In fact, the world has witnessed an unprecedented push for war with Russia with N.A.T.O. exercising in Latvia, the Black sea area and Europe and Australia causing untold damage to the Russian economy with their economic sanctions.

The problem of course was that with the internet and the speedy dissemination of photos of the wreckage and the conflicting witness statements about at least one Ukrainian jet following flight MH17 at the moment of the crash it was always going to be a hard task to persuade anyone.

In fact the Russian Military released radar and satellite imagery information confirming that a Ukrainian SU-25 was following MH17 at the time of the crash with a distance of 3-5 km and that their inboard machine guns could hit a target up to 12 kilometres away.

In plain English ‘high speed objects’ or ‘outside objects’, especially if they are all of the same diameter, perfectly round and of a diameter consistent with bullets, are called bullets.

The problem with that of course is that to admit that the plane was downed by a jet – at least three witnesses told of a Ukraine jet following the plane – would be to admit that it could not have been a Russian BUK ground-to-air missile. It would mean that all the N.A.T.O. exercises had no bases other than the N.A.T.O. alliance wanting to have a scrap with Russia.

So, how are ‘Western’ governments going to react to this news? Are they going to demand an open transparent investigation?

AFP, ASIO, National Security Agency, Watching

Snowden Docs Expose How the NSA “Infects” Millions of Computers, Impersonates Facebook Server

http://www.democracynow.org/2014/3/17/snowden_docs_expose_how_the_nsa

NSA has masqueraded as a fake Facebook server to infect a target’s computer and exfiltrate files from a hard drive.

Budget, commission of audit

Tony Abbott Village Idiot

wrong direction

All over the world, the challenge to the old order is growing

Eva Bee illustration of a turbulent game of risk

 

The powers that be will fight back against attempts to change the status quo, economically or globally

A decade and a half into the 21st century, we’re still living through the aftermath of two epoch-making shocks. The first was the demonstration of the limits of US power in the killing fields of Afghanistan and Iraq – the war on terror that broke the spell of invincibility of the world’s first truly global empire. The second was the financial crash of 2008 and the crisis of the western-dominated economic system it unleashed, still playing havoc with economies and lives across the world more than six years later.

That crisis will shape politics in Europe in 2015, from London to Madrid. But the impact will be felt first in Athens. The slump and stagnation that followed the crash has already fuelled the rise of the populist right. Now, after years of self-defeating austerity and falling living standards, the radical left has leapfrogged ahead to challenge for power in the most devastated eurozone economies of Greece and Spain.

It was a backlash waiting to happen. In Greece the leftwing Syriza party, which rejects the austerity enforced across the eurozone by its unelected troika, is favourite to win the snap elections called for the end of January. Syriza may have stepped back from its one-time demand for unilateral debt cancellation, its programme to boost living standards in the wake of a 1930s-style depression may be modest, and mainstream voices across Europe may also be calling for a change of direction. But Europe’s governing elites will have none of it.

Expect a ferocious campaign to terrify Greek voters, who have already been warned by the European commission’s Jean-Claude Juncker not to vote the “wrong” way. If Greeks still insist on making their own democratic choice, everything will be done to force Syriza to retreat. If all else fails, Greece will be punished for fear that others, such as Spain’s new Podemos party, might go down the same route later in the year.

The powers that be in Europe are determined to prop up a failed economic model regardless of the cost – as they will be in Britain if Labour wins the general election in May. The aftershocks of the breakdown of that neoliberal regime are still being felt across the world economy – in falling commodity prices, capital flight, stagnation and recession. But the interests that depend on it won’t let go without a serious challenge.
Advertisement

That’s just as true in terms of global power. The US and its satellites, including Britain, may have suffered a strategic defeat in Iraq and Afghanistan – symbolised by last weekend’s ceremony to mark the end of Nato’s combat mission, held in secret for fear of Taliban attacks. But they’re not letting go either. Some 13,000 troops are staying on as “trainers”, just as thousands of western troops have been returning to Iraq for the war against Isis – the al-Qaida breakaway spawned by their own invasion and occupation – with talk of a major assault in the spring.

In the same spirit, every effort was made at the time of the Arab uprisings of 2011 to hijack, control or crush them. Some of the results can be seen today in the disaster zone across the Middle East, the growing power of the western-backed autocracies of the Gulf, the brutality of Egypt’s new dictatorship and the maelstrom in post-intervention Libya, whose civil war is likely to intensify in the coming months.

Meanwhile, Russia’s challenge to untrammelled US strategic power, which began in Georgia in 2008 and intensified through Syria’s proxy war, has come to a head in the conflict in Ukraine. There has been much western crowing in recent weeks that the combination of collapsing oil prices with US and EU sanctions has plunged Russia into recession, while knocking chunks out of the economies of other independent oil states such as Iran and Venezuela into the bargain. It seems clear enough that the Saudi regime’s decision to boost oil output when prices were already falling was designed not only to protect market share and undercut fracking, but to punish Iran and Russia for their role in the Middle East and Europe to the benefit of Riyadh’s US sponsor.

It is a form of economic warfare – hailed by President Obama this week as the fruit of “strategic patience” – the consequences of which will be felt across the world in the months to come. But along with the global power and economic shocks of the past decade, two other crucial shifts have defined the early 21st century: the economic rise of China, in defiance of market orthodoxy, and the tide of progressive change that has swept Latin America, opening up alternatives to neoliberal capitalism.

Both have continued despite the backwash from the crash, which has taken its toll on the “Brics” countries and the wider global south. Progressive governments have carried on being elected from Bolivia to Brazil, while China’s slowing growth rate is still almost double that delivered by the US recovery. Political and financial pressure on Venezuela, which has been crucial to Latin America’s transformation and already faces serious economic problems, however, looks set to increase in the coming year. The key to riding the storm, as elsewhere, will be who is made to shoulder the burden of falling income and reform.

What seems certain though is that, however much the west tries to recapture lost ground, the global order will not revert to the status quo ante. There may be growing conflict, but there will be no return to unchallenged US diktat or uncontested economic catechisms. Alternative centres of power are forming. Both internationally and domestically, the old order is coming apart. The question will be what replaces it.

crime

Mass Incarceration’s Collateral Damage: The Children Left Behind | The Nation

Mass Incarceration’s Collateral Damage: The Children Left Behind | The Nation.

Bills Passed, Hostile Senate

You must be so glad your a Liberal voter they do nothing for the citizens of this country.

You must be so glad you voted Liberal. #notfittogovern
Was Julia Gillard the most productive prime minister in Australia’s history?
How do we measure the effectiveness of a government? There are polls, both of opinion and at the ballot box, but these don’t really offer us any measure of effectiveness. You can look at the economy and measu1re the health of the populace – and these are both good indicators – but are not wholly under the influence of the government of the day.

One way might be to look at the ability of a government to pass legislation. Admittedly this is a quantity over quality approach, but it does offer us a quantitative measure of a government, political party or prime minister. Someone that gets a lot of legislation passed might be considered to be good at getting things done.

I took all of the Commonwealth of Australia Numbered Acts and assigned them to a prime minister, political party, and parliament based on the date of assent of the act. This isn’t entirely exact, as some legislation may be introduced under one PM and passed under another, though I believe it is a good proxy.

From this dataset, I counted the total acts for each PM, party, and parliament. Then, I determined the number of days in office for each PM, and the number of days each parliament and party governed. Using these figures you can calculate a rate of acts per day, which accounts for different lengths of prime ministers’ or governments’ terms.

The results? Julia Gillard had the highest rate of passing legislation with a rate of 0.495, followed by Bob Hawke at 0.491:

coexistence, SMC, Sutoro, Syriac Christians

A glimpse into the world of Syria’s Christian “Sutoro” fighters

Syriac Christians are generally considered to fear Islamic rebels and therefore unconditionally back Assad’s regime, but this is not the case in the predominantly Kurdish autonomous cantons commonly known as “Rojava”, where they have their own armed forces, rule their districts and advocate coexistence as an “alternative” to the civil war.

“Sutoro” is now the official Syriac Christian security force of the Kurdish-led autonomous cantons in northeast Syria.

It was founded in 2013 as a loose united front to defend the Christian neighbourhoods, but turned official earlier this year on January 22, when Syriac Christians joined the establishment of three predominantly Kurdish autonomous cantons of Cizire, Kobane and Efrin in northeast Syria.

Sutoro initially included Christian locals tied to the Syriac Union Party (SUP), but anybody can join now regardless of political affiliations.

“The Christian autonomist fighters of Sutoro secure the inner city of the cantons”

The Christian autonomist fighters of Sutoro secure the inner city of the cantons while it is the Syriac Military Council (SMC), formerly a paramilitary wing of the SUP, that mainly fights in the frontlines alongside the Kurdish armed forces in the outskirts against regime soldiers and Islamic rebels.

Sutoro secures the supply lines to the frontlines and occasionally join the battles whenever simultaneous offensives by the army and jihadist groups seem on the rise.

The Sutoro central command is now based in the predominantly Kurdish city of Al-Qamishli, considered as part of the Cizre autonomous canton.

It is relatively safe compared to rest of war-torn Syria, but sudden skirmishes in Al-Qamishli city center and constant fighting in the outskirts are all too common these days.

This is because the entire Al-Hasakah province is divided between and controlled by rival armed forces.

The regime’s National Defense Force (NDF) controls parts of Al-Hasakah province as well as a couple of Arab neighbourhoods in Al-Qamishli.

Islamic rebels of the Al-Nusra Front and Islamic State of Iraq and Al-Sham (ISIS) control their respective areas in the Al-Hasakah province toward the plains and neighbouring Deir Ezzor province.

Kurds and Christians control the rest of the Al-Hasakah province, including large swathes of the plains as well as the their districts in central and northwest Al-Qamishli.

Prior to the civil war, a car journey from the city of Al-Hasakah to Al-Qamishli took around 1 hour; it now takes several hours, as one has to discretely avoid the always-on-alert checkpoints set up along the way by these territorial armed forces.

William Ibrahim, 24, was a hacker and targeted state-owned websites before the civil war reached Christian inhabited areas.

He took up arms two years ago and now leads a Sutoro unit defending the predominantly Christian Firdausi neighbourhood in central Al-Qamishli.

“I was an anti authoritarian person but believed in the Internet not rifles,” said Ibrahim. “I took up arms when I realised that my Syriac nation, Kurds and others in the northeast are in danger of being massacred by the major forces of the civil war.”

He said that the Christians in Syria do not fear the major forces in today’s Syria; it is just that they have experienced mass annihilations by Islamic rulers in the recent past, the most notorious of all being the 1890’s Sayfo massacre carried out by the Turkish-led Ottoman Empire said to have systematically killed hundreds of thousands of Syriac Christians in conjunction with the Assyrian, Armenian and Greek genocides.

“We fear that the same could happen in today’s Syria as Islamic extremists condemn us to death because we are neither Arab nor Muslim,” he explained. “The Kurdish-led self-rule autonomy managed to fight back and has prevented such massacres from taking place for the time being, but nobody is sure about the future.”

“Syriac Christians and Kurds advocate coexistence because this is the only solution. If applied elsewhere in Syria it can end the civil war,” Ibrahim continues. “It has been a very tough resistance for us Christians and Kurdish comrades alike amid this mayhem, but we have proved that the alternative to vehement nationalism and religious sectarianism is offered only by us, the most oppressed and neglected peoples of Syria.”

Although an official figure of the Syriac Christian population is not yet available in Syria, Christians are said to make up 10% of the country’s 22 million people.

Combatants of all ages above 17 are seen in the Sutoro armed units, but it is the Syriac Christian youths that make up most of the rank and file members.

“I was an anti authoritarian person but believed in the Internet not rifles”

The Christian religious symbols, various forms of the cross and Jesus’s name tattooed on the hands and arms of these young fighters signify their strong determination and willingness to fight for their ethnic and religious rights.

They proudly show religious tattoos that weren’t done for fashion or popular styles, but to prevent them from lying about their religion if one day captured alive by nemesis jihadists and held captive inside the enemy’s camp.

Gabi Dawd, 23, who has a Jesus tattoo on his left arm, said, “I first fought alongside Kurdish comrades in the ranks of the Peoples Protection Units  (YPG) before joining the Sutoro. If you put yourself in our place as Kurds and Christians then you would understand why we are fighting for our rights. The regime wants us to be puppets, deny our ethnicity and demand an Arab-only state. On the other hand, Islamic forces call for Jihad, war and Islamic Caliphate. We are neither of those and would rather die fighting for our freedom.”

He added: “I have the name of Jesus tattooed on my arm so I can never lie about my faith if I’m captured alive by the enemy and fear may overcome my bravery.”

It is vague to see and foretell what the future holds for these determined armed Christian autonomist fighters in Syria, but regardless of the consequences, history would not forget this resistance for peaceful coexistence in a country alienated and nearly lost to bloodstained sectarianism fueling a reactionary civil war.

collective punishment, piracy

Israel freezes Palestinian tax funds over international criminal court move : Any criticism of Israel is frobidden

MIDEAST-GAZA-LIFE

Palestinian leaders call Israel’s decision to withhold tax transfers an act of piracy and ‘collective punishment’

Israel has halted transfers of the tax revenue it collects on behalf of the Palestinians in retaliation for their move to join the international criminal court in the Hague, according to Israeli media.

The Palestinians announced earlier this week that they are joining the international criminal court in the Hague to pursue war-crimes charges against Israel. The move is meant to pressure Israel into withdrawing from the territories that Palestinians demand for a future state.

The move drew threats of retaliation from Israel and criticism from the US government, which called it “counterproductive”.

The daily newspaper Haaretz reported on Saturday that Israel had decided to withhold the taxes it collects for the Palestinians under the current interim peace accords and transfers each month to the Palestinian Authority. December’s tax transfer is about $127m, according to Haaretz.

An unnamed Israeli government official confirmed the substance of the reports but refused to elaborate.

Senior Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat lashed out at the Israeli manoeuvre, calling it an act of piracy and a “collective punishment” against the Palestinian people.

“If Israel thinks that through economic pressure it will succeed in diverting our approach from freedom and independence, then it is wrong,” Erekat told the Associated Press. “This is the money of the Palestinian people and Israel is not a donor country.”

Israel has stopped tax transfers before but such freezes have been short-lived.

Withholding the funds is just one of several actions Israel could take against the Palestinians, including expanding West Bank settlement construction and curbing certain privileges. Israel’s Channel 2 news reported on Saturday night that prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu would convene his cabinet in the coming days to discuss further retaliatory steps. The US government has not said how it will react, but it provides hundreds of millions of dollars in aid to the Palestinians.

Turning to the international court at the Hague marks a major policy shift, transforming Palestinian president Mahmoud Abbas’s relations with Israel from tense to openly hostile.

Abbas has been under heavy domestic pressure to take stronger action against Israel amid months of rising tensions over the collapse of US-brokered peace talks last spring, a 50-day war between Israel and Palestinian militants in Gaza over the summer, a recent spate of deadly Palestinian attacks on Israelis, and unrest over access to a key holy site in Jerusalem.

Defense, Spending, USA

Death Toll Continues To Rise In Armed Forces Bowl Tragedy

Death Toll Continues To Rise In Armed Forces Bowl Tragedy

wreckage

FORT WORTH, TEXAS (CT&P) – The death toll topped 4000 this morning as rescuers continued to pull victims from the ruins of the Amon G. Carter Stadium after two Lockheed Martin F-35 jets collided during a halftime flyover. Reuters is reporting that government authorities say that the toll could go much higher in the next few days as more rubble is removed from the south end zone.

stadium2

The tragic collision occurred just as three F-35’s were approaching the stadium in a delta formation. The jets were trailing red, white, and blue smoke in a display of patriotism meant to garner public support for the military-industrial complex. Eyewitnesses told the Dallas Morning News that two of the planes were behaving “erratically” just before the crash.

“One plane was jerkin’ side to side and its landing gear were poppin’ up and down faster than a rattlesnake!” said Angus McTurd of Tainted Springs. “It was like it was in some kinda of video game. The plane flying next to it was rearin’ up and down like steer on steroids. Just as they came over the top of the stadium they collided and one of ‘em cartwheeled into the south end zone. The other one started burnin’ and crashed over in the colored neighborhood just to the west of the stadium. It was a helluva thing to watch!”

Both pilots managed to punch out of their planes and survived the crash. Air Force spokesman Major T. J. “King” Kong told reporters that was because “the ejection seats were the only thing on the aircraft that worked worth a shit.”

??????????????????

Fort Worth Mayor Betsy Price told KDFW Fox 4 News that she had begged Pentagon officials to use some other type of plane for the flyover, but they insisted on using the F-35 Lightnings, even though they were the only three cleared to fly out of the entire fleet of troubled aircraft.

“I told those idiots we did not want those flying washing machines over our city, much less a stadium packed full of people,” said Price. “Hell, it would have been safer to fly the fucking Hindenburg over the game!”

The trillion dollar F-35 has been plagued with cost overruns, groundings, and embarrassing glitches, such as its inability to fire its cannon until 2019, when the software for the weapon is upgraded. However, this has not dampened the Pentagon’s enthusiasm for the plane and it continues to garner support from senators and representatives from states where the plane’s over 300,000 parts are manufactured.

“It’s a gorgeous plane and we fully believe that some day it will actually be able to fly on a regular basis,” said General Jack Ripper, USAF (Retired). “Every new weapons system is bound to have a few snags or hitches in development, and I don’t think we should condemn an entire program for a single slip up.”

majorkong

General Ripper is a lobbyist for Lockheed Martin.

Some cable pundits expressed surprise that the game was allowed to continue after the plane incinerated several thousand fans, but Pentagon officials on the bowl committee insisted that it would be good for the public to get used to these types of incidents, because over 2500 of the flying deathtraps will eventually be in service in the USAF alone.

“Things explode every day,” said General Martin Dempsey, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs. “If we stopped what we were doing every time something blew up, we’d never get anything accomplished.”

Houston managed to win the game 35-34 over the Pitt Panthers after an incredible comeback in the fourth quarter. Many sports analysts attributed the comeback to the Pittsburgh player’s reluctance to approach the south end zone, which was a sea of fire and twisted wreckage for most of the second half.

The third F-35 Lightning was last seen flying erratically towards the U.S.-Mexico border and remains unaccounted for. Air Force personnel have been unable to raise the aircraft by radio because of a glitch in the F-35 communications systems and stealth safeguards built into the plane are making it very difficult to spot on radar.

Scott Morrison

Arise Scott Morrison, Lord Sixwords of Cronulla! – » The Australian Independent Media Network

Image from couriermail.com.au

Arise Scott Morrison, Lord Sixwords of Cronulla! – » The Australian Independent Media Network.

Failure, Restart

Key Abbott government employment scheme struggles to meet target

Employment Minister Eric Abetz.

A key plank of the Abbott government’s employment strategy is on the cusp of failure, with just over 500 job seekers so far joining a scheme meant to benefit 32,000.

The $10,000 Restart incentive was unveiled in Treasurer Joe Hockey’s May 2014 budget, the latest bid to tackle a policy area that has long vexed both sides of politics: how to encourage employers to hire mature-age Australians.

Moments after the budget was handed down, Employment Minister Eric Abetz said Restart “more than delivers on the government’s 2013 election policy commitment to lift workforce participation and improve quality of lifeE

It was projected to help up to 32,000 people annually.

However, Senate documents show employers have hired only 510 job seekers through the scheme in the five months since its July introduction.

There are nearly 175,000 Australians over 50 looking for work through Job Services Australia.

The documents warn it is difficult to predict the take-up rate for the $10,000 incentive but it was “likely” demand would grow. If it does not, it’s possible the program could fall 95 per cent short of the government’s target.

Job seekers aged 50 or over who have been receiving income support for at least six months are eligible. Employers who hire them receive up to $10,000 depending on whether milestones are met.

The government has budgeted $524.8 million to fund the project over four years.

Prime Minister Tony Abbott and Senator Abetz point to the scheme as an important component of the government’s so-called Economic Action Strategy.

“As our population ages it’s more important than ever that we try to ensure older people are contributors economically as well as simply culturally and that’s what will happen under an incoming Coalition government,” Mr Abbott said during the 2013 election campaign.

Senator Abetz on Thursday said the government “expects that take-up will increase as employers become aware of the programme”.

“As it stands, there are more than 600 mature-aged workers in jobs today that weren’t as a result of this programme,” he said, suggesting the total number has grown slightly since the 510 figure was reported in the Senate documents.

“The government is focused on building a stronger and more prosperous economy which will see more employment opportunities as employers gain confidence.”

Luring more mature-age Australians into the workforce is a potential boon for the economy but finding the right policy settings to make it happen has vexed both sides of politics for many years.

Under questioning at Parliament House earlier this year, Department of Employment deputy secretary Martin Hehir said programs targeting mature-age workers had proven to be “quite intractable”.

Just 230 employers took advantage of a $1000 annual subsidy under the two-year life of the Gillard/Rudd government’s Jobs Bonus scheme. That program was also meant to benefit up to 10,000 employers.

“So in one sense we know what has not worked in the past, and it has been quite an intractable area,” Mr Hehir said.

“So while the days are very early and the numbers are probably still low to begin with, you would probably have to say that it [Restart] is making faster progress than the previous work in this area.”

The Abbott government’s Commission of Audit noted that the effectiveness of wage subsidies “is open to question” because they may displace other job seekers and jobs may be lost once incentives expire.

Meanwhile, another job-creation scheme has also struggled to gain traction. The Tasmanian Jobs Programme, which offers $3250 to employers in an effort to revive the state’s sluggish labour market, has created 114 jobs in its first year. The government said it would employ 2000 Tasmanians over two years.

Opposition employment services spokeswoman Julie Collins said wage subsidies were “not enough” to support older Australians.

“We have Tony Abbott telling Australians they need to work longer – but in what jobs? People aren’t taking up wage subsidies because the jobs aren’t there,” she said.

The government has pledged to re-evaluate Restart in mid-2016.

 
Ideology

What Does It Mean to Be Anti-Police? Apparently, to criticize the police is to be anti-police. But if I call and point out that the swings in the playground are broken, am I anti-parks?

 

Riot police and protester

 

What Does It Mean to Be Anti-Police? | The Nation.

class, values

Tony Abbott – Worst PM in Australian History: Corporate government citizen control.

Incarceration

Social Equality by Andrew Bolt…..Times have’nt changed. 3% 0f our population 30% of our prisons.

BigDecisions.com, Money

Rupert Murdoch: It’s all about the money, money, money: Lessons from the Koch Brothers

Rupert Murdoch’s family fortune is valued at about $15 billion, but he plans to increase that substantially before his time comes to an end, writes Rodney E. Lever.

AN AMERICAN LAWYER once made an astute observation:

“Rupert Murdoch is very good at what he does. The question is: is what he does any good?”

I tend to think rather of Rupert’s smile when he knows he is in trouble. He seems like a crocodile barely suppressing a savage snarl.

The smiling crocodile will be celebrating his 85th birthday on March 11 and must be giving some thought to the inevitable march of time.

Those who like to measure monetary wealth have put Rupert Murdoch’s family fortune at about $15 billion. That sum is about three-quarters of what it takes today to appear in Forbes magazine as among the world’s super rich.

Rupert is clearly planning to increase his wealth and soon.

The early polls for this year’s British election has the Labour Party in a strong position. If the Tories lose in 2015, Murdoch will surely have to reconsider the future of his operations in Britain.

Times Newspapers Ltd has been losing money from the day he acquired them. There is no sign of them ever being profitable, despite some dubious accounting techniques to pretend they are making money. The Sun remains profitable, but is losing ground, no longer with the total freedom to wreck the lives of famous people who sometimes fall into human error.

Rupert has never been popular with British Labour since his wooing of Margaret Thatcher, his crushing of the printing unions, and the time when he coddled Tony Blair and John Howard, and helped to start the Iraq war for George W Bush.

Given the hacking scandal that continues to haunt him and exposes more suspicious activity as time passes, he might be politely asked by a new British Labour government to shut the door on the way out.

Rich people like to “Think Big”. That’s what carried families like the Rothschilds, the Oppenheimers and the Rockefeller’s through most of the 20th century.

The latest Forbes magazine list of the richest families are not British or Americans. The top ten last year carried names like Fontbana, in Chile; Bailleres, in Mexico; Albrecht, in Germany; and Kwok, in Hong Kong.

With their wealth measured at more than USD $20 billion each, none has made their money from flogging newspapers. Common to them are either family inheritance or enterprising ideas and hard work.

News Corporation (which is Rupert by another name) has bought an internet investment in India, BigDecisions.com, without so far revealing the cost.

He has also bought a 25% share in another Indian internet company named PropTiger, for $30 million. PropTiger provides online real estate advertising, contiguous with his online U.S. real estate Move and his online Australian REA Group.

He flies stacks of daily issues of The Australian and the Wall Street Journal to India every day and spreads them around. It pushes up their circulation figures even when they are given away free.

News Corp investors have been told that BigDecisions.com

‘… will help Indian consumers make smarter financial decisions through interactive, decision-making tools powered by sophisticated algorithms and data.’ 

Advanced technology will provide

“… reliable and independent data to help investors in India make important decisions using accurate information tailored to their independent needs.”

BigDecisions.com was launched in 2013 by two Indian investors, Manish Shah and Gaurav Roy. With News Corp money in the bank they will go on to start new ventures that they might be able to sell Rupert too.

Rupert’s interest in India may have been stimulated by the 2008 financial crisis, blamed on the George W. Bush administration in the US for creating a fresher climate for illegal activity that greatly harmed innocent investors.

Bush and the Republican Congress lifted restrictions on share trading after the debacle of the Iraq war. Some of the erased regulations dated back to the World War I depression of 1929, and set conditions that led to World War 2, leaving Britain broke and the U.S. as the richest country on the planet.

When Barack Obama became president in 2009, he appointed a new head of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, Mary Jo White, now 68 years old, but a notoriously tough lady, who has reconstructed a new set of protective measures for investors.

She proved to be a guardian angel of the U.S. economy, re-instituting and strengthening rules and regulations that set boundaries for the major banks, stockbrokers and share traders.

Rupert Murdoch is attracted to India, now one of the world’s larger economies. Its economic growth increased from 4.7% in 2013 to 5.5% in 2014 and expects a further increase in 2015. America is still the world’s leader, with its GDP three times larger than India.

The U.S. suffered considerable damage in the crash of 2008, much of it due to gung-ho management of Wall Street after the Securities and Exchange Commission’s deregulated.

The development of faster electronic share trading represents about 85% of all stockmarket trading.

Systems have grown to a point where vast amounts of money can be shifted around the world at an incredible speed: one million dollars can be transferred anywhere one single second.

Electronic machines are only as fallible as the human beings who touch the keyboard. Some investors wonder if financial transfers at the speed of light could cause unimaginable consequences. Time will tell.

One way or another the rich will get richer and the poor will get poorer. That’s still the way of the world. Rupert Murdoch surely plans to continue this trend.

Quote by Tony, Team Man

The self pride of Tony Abbott I can only sledge

Quote from one-trick Tony today: “I couldn’t bat, I couldn’t bowl, I couldn’t field, but I could sledge, and I think I held my place in the team on this basis”…Can’t lead, won’t follow, doesn’t learn, but good at throwing rocks, and proud of reputation as a wrecker.

Memes

Tony Abbott Village Idiot: Transparancy

Polls

Tony Abbott’s current polling woes don’t stem from the budget or broken promises, but from the simple fact that he was only elected to get rid of Labor,

Kevin Rudd and Tony Abbott debate during the second people's forum.

 writes Phil Arnold.

Recently there’s been a rush of political analysts to offer explanations for the seemingly inexplicable: polls showing the federal Coalition falling behind the Labor Party opposition in every state but Western Australia, and the man against whom successive Labor prime ministers failed to gain even a modicum of traction when he was opposition leader, demonstrably failing to gain the confidence of the electorate as Prime Minister.

The truth is that the likelihood of Tony Abbott presiding over a one-term federal government increases by the month – a suggestion that has political pundits scratching their heads and holders of marginal conservative seats looking decidedly twitchy.

The most frequent and oft repeated explanations for this political conundrum are the unpopularity of a budget regarded by both sides of the political divide as grossly unfair, and the string of broken promises from a Prime Minister who, when in opposition, made huge political capital out of the broken promises of the Gillard and Rudd led governments.

But, in truth, neither of these explanation stands up under close scrutiny. Other governments have survived unpopular policy decisions: Hawke’s tariff cuts and floating of the dollar, Keating’s interest rate rises and recession we had to have, and Howard’s GST. As for broken promises, the electorate has long ceased to regard the promises of politicians with anything other than well-founded scepticism. Even the most politically naïve could predict the explanations used to justify the abandonment of such hand-on-heart guarantees.

So, if not these, what? The genesis of the Abbott Government’s poor standing can be found in the reason it was elected in the first place. It was not out of any belief that Abbott was the answer to an electorate’s prayers. He didn’t inspire with the physical presence and rhetoric of Whitlam or Menzies, nor was he carried to power on a wave of voter adoration as was Hawke. He didn’t even beguile the electorate with the cheeky, larrikin charm of Keating or the perceived stability of Howard.

No. Abbott gained the prime ministership as a direct result of the electorate’s determination to dispose of a Labor government perceived as incompetent and addicted to suicidal in-fighting. The fact is, that Labor committed political harakiri and Abbott was the proverbial “drover’s dog” waiting to step into the breach.

That, as opposition leader, he played the Labor government for the political suckers they were (and with rare skill and single-minded determination), is undeniable. But so too is the fact that Labor’s fate was sealed well before the election, and a reversal of its fortunes was beyond contemplation.

The truth is, that the Australian electorate is, if not politically astute, certainly more capable of corporate pragmatism than many political commentators give them credit for. In this case, they were perfectly prepared to suffer the short-term agony of an unpopular prime minister in order to rid themselves of a troublesome incumbent, knowing full well that three years is a mere blink of an eye in political terms.

And it’s not too great a stretch of the imagination to further suggest that the same electorate deliberately minimised the potential for long-term damage by depriving Abbott of the senate majority necessary to pursue an unpopular political agenda.

There are precedents that support this proposition. In 1975 and 1977 the electorate elected the unpopular Malcolm Fraser as prime minister in successive landslide victories. They did so not out of any love for Fraser. Like Abbott, he just happened to be the opposition leader at a time when the electorate was determined to rid itself of a government they perceived as incompetent.

Similarly, John Howard, having ousted the Keating Labor government in 1996, in an election that saw the Labor Party reduced to its lowest primary vote in more than 60 years, only just held onto power at the end of his first term when Kim Beasley, as Labor Leader, won the popular vote but not a majority of seats in an electoral anomaly. It was perhaps only the so-called Tampa crisis, when the Norwegian ship entered Australian waters carrying a boatload of rescued asylum seekers, that saved him from defeat three years later.

Now, despite Abbott’s attempts as prime minister to bolster his electoral popularity with a succession of hairy-chested foreign policy responses, the electorate still refuses to see him as anything other than a short-term and expedient way of replacing a Labor government that was beyond redemption. The voters made up their minds about Abbott even before he was opposition leader. They’ve never liked him. They’ve never trusted him. They’ve never wanted him. And, unless the Liberal Party can come up with a popular and credible alternative, it will be consigned to political oblivion as quickly and decisively as its Labor Party predecessors.

Phil Arnold is a freelance writer, composer, teacher and musician living in Sydney. View his full profile here.

Americanisation of labour, Casualisation of labour, Wages

Employers step up efforts to get rid of penalty rates

 

 

Late night loading, which gives workers an extra 10 to 15 per cent per hour, could be stripped from the award. Photo: Tamara Voninski

Australian industry is mounting a concerted campaign to wind back and abolish weekend and public holiday penalty rates, particularly in the hospitality sector.

Employer submissions to the Fair Work Commission’s review of minimum wage conditions across the economy filed in the last weeks of the year reveal the hitlist for business groups, which argue they need greater flexibility and lower costs in the face of tough trading conditions.

The commission is reviewing more than 200 awards that provide minimum wage, hours and other conditions. As part of that exercise it is conducting a separate examination of penalty rates that will flow into a number of awards.

Restaurant & Catering Association chief executive John Hart.Restaurant & Catering Association chief executive John Hart. Photo: Getty Images

The push comes as the federal government has launched a review of industrial relations through the Productivity Commission

A particular focus is hospitality. The Restaurant & Catering Association used its submission to argue that the late night loading, which gives workers an extra 10 to 15 per cent per hour, should be stripped from the award.

RCA chief executive John Hart said he would also be looking to capitalise on a recent win in another case to push for standardised penalty rates across Saturday and Sunday across the industry.

Illustration: Matt Golding.Illustration: Matt Golding.

“We are not arguing there shouldn’t be penalty rates, because the legislation says there has to be, it is now about arguing the quantum,” he said.

He said the union’s pitch in that case had been that working Saturdays was a hindrance to social life, because of children’s sport and other activities, rather than the importance of Sundays.

“They didn’t mount it around going to church. I think that bolsters our argument that Saturday and Sunday should be treated the same,” he said.

<p>

He said one-third of restaurant and catering businesses did not trade on Sundays due to high wages.

Jos de Bruin, chief executive of the Master Grocers Association, which represent independent supermarkets, said paying double time on a Sunday provided an “enormous cost burden on what is now becoming a normalised day to trade for our members”.

Mr de Bruin said a reduction from double-time – sometimes up to $50 an hour – to time and a half would allow small independent grocers to hire more staff and improve service.

Midweek breaks preferable to some families: Brickworks managing director Lindsay Partridge.Midweek breaks preferable to some families: Brickworks managing director Lindsay Partridge.

“We are doing the best we can to cope with what we’ve got, but we’re at a cliff edge now,” he said.

The major retailers are yet to lodge detailed submissions but have consistently argued for the removal or winding back of penalty rates.

Many other business groups are also targeting penalty rate reductions. The Accommodation Association wants the loading for working public holidays cut from double time and a half to time and a half.

Clubs Australia complained that its penalty rates for Saturdays and Sundays were 25 percentage points higher than the restaurant sector.

The Australian Hotels Association and the Pharmacy Guild of Australia are also seeking unspecified reductions in penalty rates. The pharmacists argue that changing consumer patterns required change.

Australia’s biggest brickmaker, ASX-listed Brickworks, is one of the few companies to have so far made a direct submission to the broader review.

It wants its workers to start at 4am, instead of the usual 6am at present, without penalties and abolish weekend penalty rates. It claims to have the support of its 1500-strong workforce for the changes.

Brickworks managing director Lindsay Partridge said for many employees, working weekends and nights was no longer considered unsociable, and taking midweek breaks was preferable for some working families.

The sector was battling to keep prices down, particularly in the face of cheaper Asian-based competitor, but paying penalties on weekends and others was eating into the companies’ profits.

“The masonry business has been in decline over the past decade or more and we would hope these changes will improve the viability of the industry,” he said.

The company wants the abolition of a 3 per cent allowance it claims is outdated having been established in the 1970s to compensate for harsher working conditions.

Brickworks featured prominently in the Liberal Party fund-raising scandal in NSW last year over its donations to the party.

Stevedores Qube and DP World used a joint submission to argue for a substantial reduction in penalty rates including from a 250 per cent loading to 150 per cent for Sundays.

The employers have foreshadowed calling dozens of witnesses to support their case at hearings slated for later in 2015.

Australian Council of Trade Unions president Ged Kearney said the industries’ arguments that weekends should have the same value for workers as weekdays was “nonsense”.

“When employers talk about getting rid of penalty rates, they find any excuse, ” she said.

“Weekends are still highly valued by workers. They are still when weddings occur, and when children aren’t at school. I always say the day they play the rugby league grand final on a Tuesday, you can say weekends are no different.”

She said it was wrong to suggest penalty rates caused financial stress on business.

“Unless they can show, which they have to date failed to, an economic case that penalty rates adversely affect businesses, they have no case, and every commission has found that they do not have a case,” she said

Ms Kearney said the ACTU would strongly defend the penalty rates currently in place.

Cairns, Gavin King

Tony Abbott Village Idiot

Filed under:
Policing, Pollitician spending, social welfare

Increased policing is the sign of increasing Fascism. The ADF has been recruited as a policing agency, next the churches that’s all it takes. However politicians’ spending is declared non transparent due to national security.

Un-Australian, Un-Catholic

Breaking faith with foreign aid partners is unkindest cut; Abbott is not only giving 23 million Australians a bad name but 2.2billion Catholics. He is truely unrepresentative of any of us.

On top of the $7.6 billion in cuts to aid since it came into office, the Abbott government will take a further $3.7 billion out over the next four years.

How shall we celebrate the New Year? From where I sit, a minute’s silence may be the best response.

I work for an Australian aid and development agency, one that waits to see where the latest round of cuts to the aid budget will fall.

Here is what we know: On top of the $7.6 billion in cuts to aid since it came into office, the Abbott government will take a further $3.7 billion out over the next four years, with 1 billion to be extracted from the coming year’s budget alone. How much will be cut from the part of our aid that is delivered through non-government agencies like mine, remains to be seen. Wherever it falls, the impact will be brutal.

For a time, from 2004, buoyed by the commitments of Labor and Coalition governments to the United Nations Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) and the resulting increasing aid levels, we saw the maturity of the aid and development sector grow. Importantly, we saw improvements in the things that the MDGs measured: more children at school, more babies born safely, more communities with safe water systems.

Australian aid does lots of good things. It enables us to invest in regional and global partnerships with cross-border programs to stop the spread of disease, to harness and share natural resources, and to help displaced people and assist after humanitarian disasters. Working with non-government agencies, our aid contributes powerfully to removing the barriers that stop people from living healthy, productive lives, enabling them to contribute to the wellbeing of their communities and to stable civic environments.

One story illustrates the expertise and effectiveness of our aid sector in Laos. Keo Chan, her husband and three children were only just getting by. With little money, they shared a small house with two other families. There was not enough rice to go around, and Keo and her husband had to travel to another village to work to feed their family. There was no extra income for daily expenses, like school fees or medicine. If emergencies came up, there was no safety net.

An integrated development project, working with the community, sparked changes. A village irrigation system has opened up new farmland, enabling Keo’s family to have their own rice paddy, and improvements to the village’s household water supply mean they can enlarge their vegetable garden, so they’re able to grow enough food. Keo has learned how to read and write. She is part of a savings and loans group and was recently asked to be the group’s bookkeeper. Keo has established her own small coffee plantation, a cash crop that she can sell to make a living. She now has her own home to live in, with space for her three children to grow.

These latest cuts break faith with the many communities like Keo’s which benefit from Australian aid. They break faith with global agencies and those agencies on the ground delivering these impressive results. They had every right to feel that these programs would be resourced for at least a few years. Short-term commitments bedevil the aid area. Most effective development takes years to bear fruit. The recent cuts remove predictability – a goal expressed strongly by Minister Bishop in an address only last February. She said, “But what I have done is stabilise the budget at $5 billion per annum. It will increase in line with inflation, so it will go up by CPI. This will provide certainty, predictability of funding for our partners, for the recipients, and will put the aid budget on sustainable financial footing.”

The massive cuts are also a breach of faith with Australian non-government agencies and will inevitably involve job losses and the cutting back of programs. The loss of expertise and professionalism from the sector will take many years to restore.

The successors to the Millenium Development Goals, the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) will be negotiated next year. How can Australia participate in their development while simultaneously drastically cutting back its own aid?

We stand at the cusp of a new year and look ahead with sorrow. Those most affected are the silent ones whose water and food supplies will remain precarious, whose babies will not be vaccinated and whose girls will not go to school. By 2017, Australia will drop from contributing 34¢ for every $100 of our national income, to 22¢. Our aid has never been so low. Other developed countries with higher debt levels than ours, have been holding their aid budgets to promised levels and some, like Britain, have even reached the UN agreed target of 70¢ per $100 of income.

I would like to see a little more faithfulness to communities that benefit from Australian aid and to the Australian people who care about these things.

As the New Year dawns, it seems more than appropriate to spare a minute’s silence for the state of Australian aid.

Fox News, Money, Politics, Privatising Democracy, Rupert Murdoch

Kochh Brothers Exposed: Murdoch’s heros and his model of influence
 

The Kochs are longtime libertarians who believe in drastically lower personal and corporate taxes, minimal social services for the needy, and much less oversight of industry—especially environmental regulation. These views dovetail with the brothers’ corporate interests. In a study released this spring, the University of Massachusetts at Amherst’s Political Economy Research Institute named Koch Industries one of the top ten air polluters in the United States. And Greenpeace issued a report identifying the company as a “kingpin of climate science denial.” The report showed that, from 2005 to 2008, the Kochs vastly outdid ExxonMobil in giving money to organizations fighting legislation related to climate change, underwriting a huge network of foundations, think tanks, and political front groups. Indeed, the brothers have funded opposition campaigns against so many Obama Administration policies—from health-care reform to the economic-stimulus program—that, in political circles, their ideological network is known as the Kochtopus. – See more at: http://www.thomhartmann.com/forum/2010/08/how-can-we-boycott-murdoch-koch-brothers-businessesthey-support-tea-party-fox#sthash.zXI7CaDr.dpuf

Filed under:
Abbott a Loner, Abbott's future

Pope Francis At Odds With GOP In 2015: If he’s at odds with the Tea Party does that mean Tony is up for excommunication?

 

Pope Francis At Odds With GOP In 2015

Pope Francis At Odds With GOP In 2015.

benefits, minimum wage, penalties

Happy New Year to all of our followers. It is soooo good to read all of your Politically and Socially Literate comments, and confirm to us that we are not alone with our aversion to anything ‘Radically Right’. And to all the Racist, Right Wing Rednecks and Trolls, please show up for work today as Public Holidays were won by Labor and the Unions and therefore should be only available to us Lefty, Commo, Socialist, Greenies, not for Union haters. Idiots!

Castro, Cuba

January 1, 1959: Fidel Castro Seizes Power in Cuba: History

Cuban revolutionaries

Cuban revolutionaries, including Fidel Castro (far left) and Che Guevara (center), in Havana in 1960. Photo via Wikimedia Commons.

Unless you have been violently evicted from your country’s presidential palace, you are already having a better new year than Cuban president Fulgencio Batista was having at this point in 1959. Revolutionaries, led by Fidel Castro, had been fighting against the corrupt, virulently anti-Communist Batista regime since 1953. At the time of the 1959 revolution, it was not yet clear that the new regime would declare itself Communist. In “Revolution Without Generals” (January 17, 1959), The Nation’s Carleton Beals reflected on the prospects and perils of the revolution.

The hero comes into power at the head of seasoned young veteran guerrilleros whose ranks were augmented only at the last moment by adhesions of rank-and-file soldiers and minor officers. He comes in at the head of a youth movement inspired with the ideal of a new free Cuba—youths recklessly willing to face torture and death, who have fought in the streets of every city and hamlet in Cuba for six long years. He comes in at the head of a student movement which has seen Cuba’s schools closed for years, which lost leader after leader to Batista’s police. He comes in at a time when every professional and civic group in Cuba—from sports clubs to the Rotary clubs—had broken with Batista. He comes in with the good will of a large sector of the Church hierarchy and certainly with the active backing of the Catholic Youth movement, the two leaders of which were recently taken out of their homes, brutally tortured and killed. He takes over a war-scarred country that yearns for peace, in which tens of thousands of homes have lost loved ones or seen them driven into exile….

Much of the course of events in the near future will depend upon the official American attitude toward Castro. Will our government be as lavishly helpful with him as it was with Batista? That has never happened before in similar circumstances. Maybe this time it will be different. And will Castro himself measure up to the great tasks that await him?

Unlike previous upheavals in Cuba, largely determined by military elements, the prolonged struggle to get rid of Batista has awakened the people and released deep and violent social forces. A revolution has been set in motion and there is little likelihood that it can be stopped short of its objectives either by outside interference or by incompetent or recalcitrant leadership. Thus far Castro has shown the finest qualities of true leadership: self-sacrifice, dedication, patience, confidence and ready pliability in meeting the most difficult situations. He may indeed come to rank with that other great Cuban, José Martí, who carved out the shape of Cuban independence.

$550, ???

Tony Abbott Village Idiot

Iraq, Jeremy Scahill, repitition of lies

Democracy Now Obama is repeating the same mistakes as Cheney Bush and Rumsfeld and Abbott is doing a Howard

http://www.democracynow.org/2014/10/3/jeremy_scahill_on_obamas_orwellian_war

GOP, Racism

White Republican Leaders Defend Fellow White Republican Leader For Defending White Rights At White Supremacist Meeting Attended By White Republicans

whitepride

WASHINGTON (CT&P) – House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio), who is technically a white person, is vigorously supporting House Majority Whip Steve Scalise (R-LA), another white person, as he faces a deluge of criticism and questions over a 2002 speech he gave to a white supremacist group.

boehnerorange

“More than a decade ago, Representative Scalise made an error in judgment. He was not secretive enough in his support of white supremacists in his state. Like many of my colleagues on our side of the aisle, I know Steve to be a man of high integrity and good character, who will stand up for the rights of wealthy white people all across this great country of ours. He has my full confidence as our Whip, and he will continue to do great and important work for all white Americans,” Boehner said in statement made today outside the “Stars and Bars,” a swanky whites-only supper club in Georgetown.

House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-CA), who is also white, is standing by Scalise as well.

“Congressman Scalise acknowledged he made a mistake and has condemned himself for being so dumb,” McCarthy said in a statement released moments after Boehner’s. “I’ve known him as a friend for many years and I know that he is much smarter than he appears. I know that if he could do it all over again, he would have insisted that the speaking engagement be held at night in some field using only torches for lighting. That way no one else would have known about it.”

The show of support from GOP leaders came as Scalise has found himself under fire for being a guest speaker at a 2002 meeting of the European-American Unity and Rights Organization, a group founded by former Ku Klux Klan leader David Duke. A Louisiana political blogger unearthed evidence of Scalise’s presence at the rally, and from there the news went viral.

Scalise, who was a state lawmaker at the time, maintains that he spoke to any groups who would give him any money whatsoever and says he didn’t know that EURO was affiliated with racists and neo-Nazi activists.

klan-mtg

“Twelve years ago, I spoke to many different Louisiana groups as a state representative, trying to build support for legislation that focused on cutting government handouts to black people and half breeds, eliminating government corruption that did not benefit big business, and stopping tax hikes on the white majority. One of the many groups that I spoke to regarding this critical legislation was a group of folks wearing swastikas and white hoods. I want to stress that I had no idea that they were Nazis or members of the Ku Klux Klan. Had I known they were members of any white supremacist groups, I would have been much more circumspect with my support. It was a mistake I regret, and I want everyone to know that I emphatically oppose any groups that would divide the white majority and thus hurt my chances of re-election,” said Scalise.

He continued, “As a Christian, these groups hold views that are vehemently opposed to my own personal faith, and I reject any kind of hateful bigotry except the kind that keeps desperate Hispanic kids on the Mexican side of the border and prevents homosexuals from enjoying the same civil rights as straight Americans. Those who know me best know I have always been passionate about helping, serving, and fighting for every white family that I represent. And I will continue to do so.”

Duke described Scalise as “a pretty nice guy” and “a family man” and “very white” in a Monday night interview with The Huffington Post. He also said it seemed a bit strange that Scalise — who had a friendly relationship with Duke’s campaign manager Kenny Knight, the EURO event’s organizer — claims he didn’t know what the group’s message was about.

“It would seem to me that the son of bitch knew exactly what the fuck he was doing and this is just another example of the white GOP leadership not having the guts to stand up for what they believe in,” said Duke.

contraception

Can Catholics Still Use The Rhythm Method Or Would That Be Too Off-Beat For Centrelink?

pt j

There’s an article in The Australian – from a former Labor Minister so the Liberals can’t blamed for this (yet?) – which suggests that contraception be compulsory for people on welfare. It won’t let me link it directly but you can find it easily enough by searching for Gary Johns, “No Contraception, No Dole” or read a summary here.

It begins:

IF a person’s sole source of income is the taxpayer, the person, as a condition of benefit, must have contraception. No contraception, no benefit.

Of course it does go on to say:

“And so it was that taxpayers were confronted with two cases over Christmas. Both happened to be indigenous, but of course, many non-indigenous cases abound.”

Now, I could go on with some of the things in the article which sound just a wee bit racist. (Can one be “a wee bit racist”, or is it like being slightly pregnant?) However, because I’m sure that plenty of other people will do that, I prefer to consider the proposal seriously and look at the practicalities of introducing such a scheme.

A number of questions occur to me.

  1. Would it apply to all welfare recipients and therefore include those on a disability pension?
  2. Would Catholics be exempt from using the contraception methods that are forbidden by the Pope and be allowed to simply use the rhythm method?
  3. Would age pensioners be exempt on the grounds that they were past the childbearing age, or would that be discriminatory?
  4. If you used contraception for, say, five months before getting pregnant, would you be required to repay your benefits?
  5. Would you be responsible for your own contraception or would be supplied to you at interviews with your employment provider?
  6. If you skipped a day on the Pill, would you be obliged to report it to Centrelink?
  7. Would inspectors be required to check that you were actually using the condoms?

I’m sure that there are other questions that need to be answered, but I won’t worry too much because I suspect that this proposal is too wacky, even for our current government.

Although, I have just heard about an aged pensioner who received a text message from Centrelink telling them that they’d have to report every fortnight. One presumes that it’s a mistake. Surely!

welfare

Pensioners, unemployed, sport, schools and solariums to be hit by laws on New Year’s Day

 

From December 31 solariums will have to become spray tan-only operations.

 

Pensioners, unemployed, sport, schools and solariums to be hit by laws on New Year’s Day.

Classless Society, Ideology

America is a lie: Alleged classlessness in a class society

America is a lie: Alleged classlessness in a class society. American society classless

It was Marx who called the world’s attention to ideology, which is a mask and cloak for concealing class antagonisms. The ancient Egyptians, whose ideology appears to have been glorifying their ruler, built stupid pyramids to exult but one man, the pharaoh, who took it easy in the shade with his harem while the common Egyptians slaved away  building the royal tomb. It did not benefit the common Egyptian to grind out a monument and labor at grinding backbreaking toil for another man. Leaders of various lands claimed descent from the gods, and if you fell for that old one–including the divine right of kings monstrosity–then perhaps there is no hope for the human race. The Aztecs feverishly tore the heart out of their human sacrifices on the temple, and then perhaps for several hours they were convinced that the sun would rise again in the east. But still they ran off and made war for captives for the offerings of their barbarism. If you were a doomed offering of the Aztecs, that was just too bad; there was noone there to rescue you, some things just have to be. Noone can rationally explain the Aztec need for Opfer. Life is full of tragedy and injustice.

The Reformation gave rise to the Counter-reformation that induced the Inquisition. But why go on in this way? History is nothing but the forcible suppression of the hopes and dreams and desires of the poor by the powerful. Thankfully the religio-imbecility Christianity, but one form of social warfare, is dead. Deus est in pectore nostro, wrote Ovid. Ideology is now usually based on economic productivity.

 

The American lie is classlessness in the reality of a class society. The American ideology is now and has always been rags to riches, but with the crucial corollary that all men have an equal chance of getting rich. Were it not for that corollary, the American ideology and its disastrous consequences might not have come about. All countries, all empires have pursued gold and mammon; there is nothing new in that. But the claim of equality in America transformed everything. Children when mature stop believing in fairy tales, but the pernicious lie “equality” continues. There is not now, and there never has been, any equality of any manner, type or persuasion in America, from Jamestown and Plymouth to the space and computer age. Yet lies can be useful, On some American stamps is the word “equality.” Politicians rapture provincial ad fortiori orating on equality. The American elite pretends it has no class privilege. And the lowliest, poorest worker in the country is allegedly endowed by equality, or rather a chance to grow rich, with a certain dignity besides being trash.

The heart of the matter was noted by the historian Christopher Lasch. The ideology of equality and getting rich “provides the elite with an antielitist ideology.” Lasch thus referred to two simple facts; in reality there is a ruling elite in the U.S., and despite appearance the elite does have an ideology. American propaganda extols first economic opportunity, and second and third some airy contemptibility for little minds called freedom and democracy. With regard to the American propaganda of “the leader of the free world,” you must assume that somewhere in the world the people are unfree. Are the Russians somehow unfree to drive to the country for a picnic?

Since the whopper is spread by media turds and others who believe an intellect is unnecessary, let me examine sociologically each institution in American society in terms of equality, and I will be certain to take “equality” and the nebulous “social equality” on their own terms. Is there any economic or financial equality in the U.S.? I had rather argue the British peerage to be democratic than that there exists any financial, economic or money equality. The money lords of Wall Street are better paid that bus drivers and dish washers.

Do Americans enjoy political equality?

Thus, anyone on television with the delusion of equality must make it subtle and magnify small insignificant truths to impute the lie.  In other words, the U.S. has such an obvious gap between rich and poor that the capitalist faithful must needs be very artful in pushing the strange co-occurrence of Marxist classlessness and American capitalist “classlessness.” George Washington and Lenin did have considerable political differences. As to small truths for greater lies, the media, for example, extol a poll stating that Americans believe that their bosses deserve their higher pay to imply in an inductive leap that impecunious Americans support the rich and superrich.

The next most important institution in society is the political. Do Americans enjoy political equality? The surest proof that this is untrue is that the powerful easily have more influence on politics than the powerless. The political and economic institutions are closely bound; in the U.S. money in the bank is politicians in the pocket. America has the most corrupt political system the world has ever seen.

The next institutions are miscellaneous–the religious, military, legal and family. Churches are as categorizable into classes as are the automobile one drives. Attending the Episcopal church is attendant with a good possibility of being rich. Catholic churches still have not economically closed the gap between themselves and the Protestant church. And know this, that the well-to-do church, such as the Episcopal, maintains a small satellite church in the poor quarter in order to keep the riffraff out of their precious shrine. In the poor black part of town it is “Jesus saves!” Mormons appear to be rather well off, although their theology is whacko. Since Jews are the single-most successful group in the U.S. attending a synagogue has a certain statistical association with wealth, though Yahweh is as real as the tourist puffery shroud of Turin.

The military and legal institutions are strictly hierarchical and have no equality. It is worth noting however, that the American military has a noted laxness of authority comporting with the spirit of democracy. The ideology of classlessness dictates a loose hierarchy compared to the military of other nations. But that laxness has not prevented the American military from constantly bombing this and that land. And finally, the American entwinement of the legal profession with politics means that everyone from the president to the lowly criminal lawyer are professional brethren. The legal profession is marked by vast differences in success; only an elite of attorneys succeed in being elected in a rigged political system to high office.

That there should even be equality in the family is strongly opposed by the right wing, yet there has been a movement to democratize it. What is most preposterous is not husband-wife equality, which might become more of a reality in the future, but instead child and parent equality. It seems that American liberalism is promoting this absurd idea. Certainly radicals are not promoting spoiled brats wanting to “divorce” their parents. Sweeping changes in the means of production have decreased Americans’ authority over their children. The advertising industry exploits children and juveniles and has a vested interest in weakening parental authority, thereby allowing the freedom to consume of the underaged. American children, so little disciplined, are conscripted by industry to increase consumer spending and thereby profit. The exploitation of the young helps to contribute to family and generational chaos. Government and industry have appropriated parental authority, in loco parentis The quality of care of the young has thus suffered. Finally, neither is there equality among families for the same reason that there is no economic equality.

American equality at bottom is nothing more than the fact that the rich are not supposed to “rub it in,” to lord it over the poor, who blame themselves for their failure. This is the basis of the American superficial friendliness and openness. The American penchant for smiling is, as it were, an acceptance of the ideology that a man has a chance to get rich. Those who do rise from rags to riches or to power become 100 percent American heroes., and hence the celebrity cult of Abraham Lincoln, Charles Lindbergh, Babe Ruth, Thomas Edison and Ben Franklin.

In sum, the ideology of wealth has formed American culture more than any other idea. Sociologists have calculated the probability of going from poor to rich and found it highly unlikely, but the slim chance has not diminished “the American way of life.”  America is many things: an economic powerhouse, a land of dramatic contrasts, a technological innovator. But above all it is a money culture, which conditions and informs every aspect of Americanism. For good or evil, the “almighty dollar, a phrase coined by Washington Irving, takes primacy and is the altar where all Americans worship.

John Fleming

John Fleming is author of a book, Word Power, available through Amazon.com

Filed under:
Politician self-interest, Progressives

Fight for Our Progressive Vision – Truthdig

Fight for Our Progressive Vision – Truthdig.

Let me conclude by relaying to you a simple but important political truth. The Republican right-wing agenda—tax breaks for the rich and large corporations, unfettered free trade, cuts to Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, nutrition and virtually every other program that sustains working families and low-income people—is an agenda supported by Fox TV. It is an agenda supported by The Wall Street Journal. It is an agenda supported by Rush Limbaugh and the 95 percent of radio talk show hosts who just happen to be right-wing. It is an agenda supported by the Chamber of Commerce and the Business Roundtable and much of corporate America.

It is not an agenda supported by the American people.

This could be well said of the Australian people at this time

Democracy

2015 The End of Australian Democracy?

museum of democracyaustralian democracy

In the recipe of what a democracy is there are many ingredients but simply explained it is a political system where like-minded people come together to form ideas that become a philosophy. They then become the foundation of political parties. These ideologies pull in different directions in a quest for majority approval by the people. It is a far from perfect system that has variations all around the world. It is elastically flexible, (we even have democratic dictatorships), unpredictable and at its worst, violent and extremely combative.

At its best it is noble, constructive and generally serves society well. It is very much better than the next best thing and accommodates diagonally opposed ideas, extreme or otherwise. All in all it’s an imperfect beast that has served us well. Yes it’s government for the people by the people.

Common to most Western Democracies (and in the absence of anything better) it has a capitalistic economic system.

In Australia the right to vote is the gift that democracy gives and people are free to vote for whichever party (or individual) they support but overriding this is the fact that people cannot possibly believe in democracy, if at the same time they think their party is the only one that should ever win.

A clear indication of an Australian Democracy in decline is the fact that people are giving up this voting gift, literally saying:

“A pox on both your houses”.

Three million did so at the last election by not voting.
Our political system is in crisis because our solicitations fail to speak with any clarity on issues that concern people.

Moreover, an enlightened democracy should provide the people with a sense of purposeful participation. It should forever be open to regular improvement in its methodology and its implementation. Its constitutional framework should be exposed to periodical revision and renewal, compromise and bi-partisanship when the common good cries out for it.

But above all its function should be, that regardless of ideology the common good should be served first and foremost. A common good healthy democracy serves the collective from the ground up rather than a top down democracy that exists to serve secular interests. One that is enforced by an elite of business leaders, politicians and media interests who have the power to enforce their version. That is fundamentally anti-democratic.

Every facet of society including the democratic process needs constant and thoughtful renewal and change. Otherwise we become so trapped in the longevity of sameness that we never see better ways of doing things.Unfortunately, Australia’s particular version of the democratic process has none of these things inherent in it and is currently sinking in a quagmire of American Tea Party Republicanism.

tea party

I am not a political scientist, historian or a trained journalist. I write this as a disgruntled and concerned citizen because it seems to me that the Australian democracy I grew up with no longer exists. The demise of Australian Democracy has its origins in a monumental shift by both major parties to the right with the result that neither seem to know exactly what it is they stand for. They are now tainted with sameness.

The Liberal Party has been replaced by neo Conservatism actively asserting individual identity against a collective one and old style Liberalism no longer has a voice. There is little or no difference between the Liberals and the National Party who seem irrelevant as a political force.

Conservatives have gone down the path of inequality with a born to rule mentality that favors the rich.

“The whole logic of the “lifters” and “leaners” rhetoric so favoured by the current Government is a distillation of the idea of that there is no such thing as society, that we and only we are responsible for our own circumstances”.
Tim Dunlop.

The Labor Party needs to rid itself of an out-dated socialist objective and invest in a social philosophical common good instead. And recognise that the elimination of growing inequality is a worthwhile pursuit.

The major parties have become fragmented with Labor losing a large segment of its supporters to the Greens whilst the LNP is being undermined by rich populist Clive Palmer in the style of Berlusconi.

In terms of talent both parties are represented by party hacks of dubious intellectual talent without enough female representation and worldly work life experience. Both parties have pre-selection processes rooted in factional power struggles that often see the best candidates miss out. Both need to select people with broader life experience. Not just people who have come out of the Union Movement or in the case of the LNP, staffers who have come up through the party.

Our Parliament, its institutions and conventions have been so trashed by Tony Abbott in particular that people have lost faith in the political process and their representatives. Ministerial responsibility has become a thing of the past.

aust parliament

Question time is just an excuse for mediocre minds who are unable to win an argument with factual intellect, charm or debating skills, to act deplorably toward each other. The public might be forgiven for thinking that the chamber has descended into a chamber of hate where respect for the others view is seen as a weakness. Where light frivolity and wit has been replaced with smut and sarcasm. And in doing so they debase the parliament and themselves as moronic imbecilic individuals.

Question time is the showcase of the Parliament and is badly in need of an overhaul and an independent Speaker. Our democracy suffers because no one has the guts to give away the slightest political advantage.

Recent times have demonstrated just how corrupt our democracy has become. We have witnessed a plethora of inquiries all focusing on illegal sickening behavior. There is no reason to doubt that the stench of NSW doesn’t waffle its way through the corridors of the National Parliament and into the highest offices.

And our democracy lacks leadership because our current leaders and their followers have so debased the Parliament that there is no compelling reason to be a politician. Well at least for people with decency, integrity and compassion.

I cannot remember a time when my country has been so devoid of political leadership. In recent times we have had potential but it was lost in power struggles, undignified self-interest and narcissistic personality.

The pursuit of power for power’s sake and the retention of it has so engulfed political thinking that the people have become secondary and the common good dwells somewhere in the recesses of small minds lacking the capacity for good public policy that achieves social equity.

Our voting system is badly in need of an overhaul. When one party, The Greens attracts near enough to the same primary votes as The Nationals but can only win one seat in the House of Representatives, as opposed to eight there is something wrong with the system. Added to that is the ludicrous Senate situation where people are elected on virtually no primary votes, just preferences. It is also a system that allows the election of people with vested business interests with no public disclosure.

murdoch media

One cannot begin to discuss the decline of Australian democracy without at the same time aligning it to the collapse in journalistic standards and its conversion from reporting to opinion. Murdoch and his majority owned newspapers with blatant support for right wing politics have done nothing to advance Australia as a modern enlightened democratic society. On the contrary it has damaged it, perhaps irreparably.

The advent of social media has sent the mainstream media into free fall. Declining newspaper sales have resulted in lost revenue and profits. It is losing its authority, real or imagined to bloggers who more reflect a grass roots society. Writers with who they can agree or differ but have the luxury of doing so. As a result newspapers in particular have degenerated into gutter political trash in the hope that they might survive. Shock jocks shout the most outrageous lies and vilify people’s character with impunity and in the process do nothing to promote decent democratic illumination. They even promote free speech as if they are the sole custodian of it.

There are three final things that have contributed to the decline in our democracy.
Firstly, the Abbott factor and the death of truth as a principle of democratic necessity. I am convinced Tony Abbott believes that the effect of lying diminishes over time and therefore is a legitimate political tool. So much so that his words and actions bring into question the very worthiness of the word truth. Or he has at least devalued it to the point of obsolesce.

The budget will be remembered for one thing. That it has given approval for and overwhelmingly legitimised lying as a political and election contrivance.
Mr Abbott has long set a high standard when it comes to keeping promises. On August 22, 2011 he said:

“It is an absolute principle of democracy that governments should not and must not say one thing before an election and do the opposite afterwards. Nothing could be more calculated to bring our democracy into disrepute and alienate the citizenry of Australia from their government than if governments were to establish by precedent that they could say one thing before an election and do the opposite afterwards.”

On the eve of the last election, after crucifying Prime Minister Julia Gillard daily for three years, Abbott made this solemn promise:

“There will be no cuts to education, no cuts to health, no change to pensions, no change to the GST and no cuts to the ABC or SBS”.

This is an unambiguous statement that cannot be interpreted any differently than what the words mean. To do so is telling one lie in defense of another.
In the budget he broke them all. As a result, a rising stench of hypocrisy and dishonesty has engulfed the Abbott prime minister-ship. When you throw mud in politics some of it inevitably sticks but there is a residue that adheres to the chucker. That is now Abbott’s dilemma but the real loser is our democracy. In Australian political history Abbott’s legacy will be that he empowered a period emblematic of a nasty and ugly period in our politics.

Our democracy is nothing more or nothing less than what the people make of it. The power is with the people and it is incumbent on the people to voice with unmistakable anger the decline in our democracy.
People need to wake up to the fact that government effects every part of their life (other than what they do in bed) and should be more concerned. But there is a political malaise that is deep seated. Politicians of all persuasions must be made to pay for their willful destruction of our democracy.
Good democracies can deliver good governments and outcomes only if the electorate demands it.

You get what you vote for rings true.

Lastly but importantly we need to educate our final year school leavers (the voters of tomorrow) with an indebtedness and fundamental appreciation of democracy. A focus group I held recently at a nearby college revealed two things. One was that our young people are conversant with societal issues and have strong opinions grounded in clear observation. They cannot however place them into a logical political framework because (two) they are not adequately informed about political dogma and its place in the workings of a democracy.

We deserve better than what we have at the moment. However, if we are not prepared to raise our voices then our democracy will continue to decline and the nation and its people will suffer the consequences.

Part two. Opinions

Three books have recently been published that address the state of our democracy. The first ‘’Triumph and Demise’’ is by The Australian’s editor-at-large, Paul Kelly. In the final chapter Kelly suggests that our political system is in trouble and that, if that is the case, then by definition so are we. The Prime Minister launched the book and in doing so fundamentally disagreed with the authors assertions.

Paul kelly
“Paul suggests that the relentless negativity of our contemporary conversation, the culture of entitlement that he thinks has sprung up over the last decade or so, means that good government has become difficult, perhaps impossible’’

“It’s not the system which is the problem, it is the people who from time-to-time inhabit it. Our challenge at every level is to be our best selves.”

In the first quote two words, negativity and entitlement jump out at you. Not necessarily in the context of the difficulty of governance, he was alluding to, but rather as self-descriptive character analysis. He could not have chosen two better words to describe his own footprint on the path to our democratic demise.

The second is a disingenuous, even sarcastic swipe at his opponents that leaves no room for self-examination or blame for his own period as opposition leader and later as Prime Minister in particular. And in another indignant self-righteous swipe he said that Labor was “much better at politics than government.”

These are quotes by Kelly at the launch.

Kelly said he increasingly felt there were “real problems” with the mechanics of the political system as he worked on his book.

“I have always believed in the quality of leadership. I have always felt that leadership was fundamental … to the success of the country,” Kelly said.

“I do think the system today makes governing, and in particular serious reform, more difficult, and I think the record does show that.”

I have not read the book but I agree entirely with his diagnosis. In the first quote I believe he is referring to a breakdown in the conventions and institutional arrangements of our democracy.

The second is a general commentary on the dearth of leadership over the past decade or so. Although he was a Howard supporter and he has recently said this of Abbott.

“Abbott is governing yet he is not persuading. So far. As Prime Minister he seems unable to replicate his success as Opposition leader: mobilising opinion behind his causes. The forces arrayed against Abbott, on issue after issue, seem more formidable than the weight the prime minister can muster.”

The third quote is a direct reference to the 24/7 News cycle and negativity as a means of obtaining power.

The second book ‘’The Political Bubble’’ by Mark Latham also addresses the state of our democracy.

3649 Political Bubble CVR SI.indd

‘’Australians once trusted the democratic process. While we got on with our lives, we assumed our politicians had our best interests at heart’’

He suggests that trust has collapsed. In this book, he freely explores and travels up and down every road of our democratic map. On the journey he talks about how democracy has lost touch with the people it’s supposed to represent. Like a fast talking cab driver he gives view on how politics has become more tribal with left and right wing politics being dominated by fanatical extremists.

An entire chapter is devoted to how Tony Abbott promised to restore trust in Australian politics and how he failed to keep his promises. Another chapter is devoted to what can be done about fixing the democratic deficit as he calls it.

‘’Can our parliamentary system realign itself with community expectations or has politics become one long race to the bottom?’’

The Rise and Fall of Australia

The third, and more recent book, by Nick Bryant (BBC correspondent and author) aptly titled The Rise and Fall of Australia ‘’How a great Nation lost its way’ ’takes a forensic look at the lucky country from inside and out. The most impressive thing about this book, besides the directness of his observations and astuteness of his writing, is that what is being said is an outsider’s point of view. He is not constrained by the provincial restrictions of self-analysis. Instead he offers his take on what he calls

‘’the great paradox of modern-day Australian life: of how the country has got richer at a time when its politics have become more impoverished.’’

Another important contribution to the democracy debate is this piece by Joseph Camilleri ‘’Democracy in crisis’’ I highly recommend this thoughtful article for a comprehensive outline of what ails our democracy.

I have alluded to these works, not as a review of each, but rather to highlight a growing concern over the state of our democracy.

There is no doubt in my mind if one looks at all the ingredients that go into forming a strong democracy, and you make a list of ingredients, the traditional recipe is no longer working. Or it has been corrupted by inferior ingredients.

At the risk of repeating myself, take for example the seemingly uncontrollable bias and market share of Murdoch. A desire for unaccountable free speech that is weighted toward, extremism. The attack on the conventions and institutions of parliament by the Prime Minister. The precedent of invoking Royal Commissions into anything as a means of retribution. The rise of fanatical right wing partisan politics and media. The decline in parliamentary respect and behavior. Add to that the right wings dismissive contempt for feminism.

Corporate sway and the pressure of the lobbyist can also be added to the mix, together with the voice of the rich that shouts the voice of inequality. The idea that with political servitude comes entitlement via financial benefit and privilege. And you can throw in the power of personalities over policy within the mainstream parties. Then there is the uninhibited corruption from both major parties. Then there is the acceptance by both sides that negativity is the only means of obtaining power.

But at the top of the list is the malaise of the population. Although we have compulsory voting 3million people at the last election felt so disgusted with our democracy that they felt more inclined to have a beer at the pub, or mow the lawn than cast a vote for Australian democracy.

If we are to save our democracy we might begin by asking that at the very least our politicians should tell the truth.

Others have also written on the subject. Democracy and diversity: media ownership in Australia

Budget Crisis or Crisis in Democracy
Another by me.

Democracy Usurped
ByJohn Kelly

Real Media, Alt News, Politics, Critical Thought, War, Global events, Australia, Headlines,
Blog at WordPress.com.