Nor do we need to kid ourselves that CPAC speakers are interested in debate. All we’ve seen and heard is personal abuse and an eagerness to win converts to conspiracies.
There is a world of difference between freedom of speech and being granted a licence to spread hate-speech. And the last thing our politicians need is to court the far-right or let themselves be used to legitimise your fear-mongering and your lies.
Forget the idea of a “multi-year, forever, project”. Once is way more than enough.
BRITAIN NOW HAS the most far-Right Government in its history with the ascension of Boris Johnson to Prime Minister. Johnson is the epitome of a Monty Python, upper-class twit but with more than a touch of thuggish bully. The UK press has given Johnson the moniker “BoJo” which is frighteningly similar to the moniker given to our very own far-Right ScoMo.
However, the similarities between Morrison and Johnson’s rise to the top go a lot further — both are part of a drive to install far-Right governments to advance the interests of U.S. imperialism. In both cases, the Murdoch press played a significant role in destabilising their predecessors.
“When I go into Downing Street they do what I say; when I go to Brussels they take no notice.”
A faction of the U.S. ruling class has decided the answer to the connected crisis of a struggling economy and rising social inequality domestically and declining power abroad is fascism. They are now attempting to reorganise the world to achieve this goal.
But is there a hidden motive behind the Murdoch media’s pro-Coalition frenzy? According to the Friends of the ABC, the secret agenda of News Corp and the Liberals is the post-election privatisation of the ABC.
Given the Coalition’s historical dislike of the national broadcaster, privatisation may well be the fate of the AB
THE FAILURE of negotiations between the Ramsay Centre for Western Civilisation and the Australian National University has ignited a culture war in the opinion pages of The Australian. One that has seeped into Federal politics and now poses a threat to the independence of universities.
The Ramsay Centre was launched back in 2017 with a $3 billion bequest from healthcare-magnate and top Liberal party donor Paul Ramsay. The half lobby group, half trust is staffed by Liberal party giants John Howard and Tony Abbott, among others.
To create this pro-Western degree, the Ramsay Centre advocated the establishment of new institutions and methods in breach of academic independence. Abbott said the group will form a committee inside ANU that will make staffing and curriculum decisions. The group’s CEO, Professor Simon Haines, reportedly said they would pull their multi-million dollar donation if the degree wasn’t sufficiently pro-Western, which would include not hiring academics who have been critical of the West. The group also wanted to send representatives to sit in on courses to carry out “health checks” on the teachers and removed “academic independence” from their memorandum of understanding with the university.
The AEF’s YouTube channel has just 11 subscribers and has posted only one video, from December 2016.
In May 2017, the AEF lent its logo to a letter to US President Donald Trump to offer “enthusiastic support” for his commitments to withdraw from the UN Paris climate agreement. But between July 2017 and February 2018, there was virtually nothing posted on its website.
Much of that website, including the “Climate News” section, is content from former Institute of Public Affairs fellow Alan Moran and postings that variously dismiss human-caused climate change and renewable energy, in particular wind power.
Ridd has been a director at the AEF since 2005. That’s a neat segue into the AEF’s history.
In late 2004, the Institute of Public Affairs – by then already pushing out climate science misinformation – held its “Eureka forum” to work out how to push back against “environmental fundamentalism” that, it claimed, was “denying farmers, foresters, fishermen, prospectors, miners, beekeepers, 4WD enthusiasts and others access rights, property rights, water rights”.
The Public Service Commissioner, John Lloyd, has resigned, hard on the heels of the recent Senate estimates hearings that probed his relations with the right-wing think tank the Institute of Public Affairs (IPA).
Destrying the PUBLIC TRUST
1985 ABC Budget was $475 Mill = 2018 $ 1 Billion today The ABC is the most efficient media in Australia that 1) Deleivers News, 2) Australian Production and Content 3) Democracy 4) Trust (ODT)
Beware of IPA Corporatism dimming the lights on Australia for Murdoch. (ODT)
A new book authored by the influential Institute of Public Affairs calls on the Turnbull government to privatise the ABC by giving it away for free to the ABC’s employees or Australian citizens.
Against Public Broadcasting, released on Friday night, labels the ABC “an anachronism” whose rationale is now redundant and which has become a $1 billion-a-year drain on the public purse.
Just how many Cabinet Ministers and LNP Politicians are paid up menmbers of the IPA Fifeild is ? Why can Murdoch’s Pay to view Channels be allowed to also take in advertising revenue and when is it obvious that programs are little more than advertorials? (ODT)
You’d think the relationship between News Corp and the business lobby was cosy enough already. But the Business Council of Australia wanted more favourable coverage of its campaign for big business tax cuts. After talking to, but not using, Cambridge Analytica to improve its campaigning style, the BCA began raising funds and locked in the support of News Corp Australia.
As part of its political campaign, For the Common Good, the business lobby inked a media deal with News Corp and Sky News for which it paid Rupert Murdoch’s empire a reported $1m.
For the cash the business lobby gets coverage of its agenda in the form of a series of television programs over 12 months, newspaper articles and community events to promote the “positive contribution of business” to the nation.
Big Business hasn’t just decided to get into the political game, as some have claimed, it has been influencing our politics forever. But as managing editor David Donovan says, the methods it has lately adopted are highly troubling.
‘The Business Council of Australia (BCA), the lobby group representing Australia’s largest companies, has decided to do politics.’
So wrote Laura Tingle in an ABC online article accompanying her debut ABC 7.30 piece on Monday night, 30 April 2018.
Really? They have just decided to “do politics”?
Of course not. The Business Council has been doing politics every day since it was formed in 1983.
Indeed, the Business Council’s stated reason for existence is
‘… to give the business community a greater voice in public policy debates about the direction of Australian society’.
Unless you have forgotten who once ruled the country and wants to again. Why. Turnbull and the moderates must go.
Bolt’s just their hack and his son is be groomed is for want of a better word.
An Institute of Pubic Affairs-sponsored journal article has been seized on by conservative media outlets. But there are a few problems
When Leigh Sales asked Malcolm Turnbull why Section 18C was getting more attention than things like “out of pocket medical expenses, the fact that suicide rate among teenage girls has gone up 45 per cent in the past year, the fact that the average Australian female worker loses nearly all of her take-home pay in…
By Christian Marx Australia is rapidly heading towards a completely stupefied populace. This is no accident! Rather, it is a concerted effort by the vested corporate interests that own all our mainstream media, and control the LNP, via their hardline, crypto Fascist organisation, the Institute of Public Affairs. If one believed the media narrative, one…
Andrew Bolt projectile vomit in print
Sunday March 13 2016 The Insidious Invasion of the IPA into Australian Politics, 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…
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.
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 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:
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.
BARRIE CASSIDY: Sure, but do you accept climate change potentially is one of the biggest impediments to growth?
JOE HOCKEY: No. No, I don’t. Absolutely not .
Well, I guess we can just accept that Joe Hockey could be right on this one. After all, climate change could lead to a lot of floods, fires and other devastation. This should be a real pick-me-up for the building industry, shouldn’t it? Impediment to economic growth? I don’t think so.
It’s just a shame that it’s still unclear that the climate even exists, let alone that man could have any effect on it. After all, we’ve been dumping stuff in the ocean for years and, in spite of what that upstart President from the USA has to say, the Barrier Reef is doing just fine, thank you.
As for those ABC cuts, well I think they’ve been well and truly dealt with. As Mr Turnbull implied, while Mr Abbott may have said no cuts to the ABC, the SBS and no changes to pensions, there was no reason to think that he was speaking on behalf of the Liberal Party. Or, indeed, was there any reason to think that he had the authority to deviate from the policies that had been so clearly spelt out by IPA prior to the election.
Of course, all these critics who are complaining (wrongly, of course) that Abbott changed his mind on the ABC, had no problem when he went against his election commitment on pensions. He clearly said they’re be “NO CHANGES TO PENSIONS” in the same interview. Yet, in spite of the fact that the intention was to eliminate all future rises, the government is still allowing some indexation, albeit at a lower rate. We didn’t hear a whimper out of the left on that one!
Now, to quote Scott Morrison from last week:
“And as former president Yudhoyono said, in advice to Australia, you’ve got to take the sugar off the table, and that’s what we’re doing.”
He pointed out that they were “taking the sugar off the table” so many times in that interview that I decided it must be some sort of metaphor and not simply a way off helping Joe to keep his weight down to somewhere near his IQ. A friend helpfully suggested that the metaphor was about making the table less attractive to ants.
“So, the asylum seekers are being compared to ants. What’s the table?”
“The table is Australia.”
“I see. I guess that means that the sugar is what makes Australia appealing. Affordable healthcare, a living wage and the Great Barrier Reef.”
So, I see it all now. Julie Bishop and Andrew Robb are right. The Liberals know what they’re doing with their Reef management. They’re taking the sugar off the table.
Silly old Obama. As if we want foreigners coming over here, telling us what to do. (And don’t say that Tony and Matthias are foreigners – that’s just racist – they’re as Australian as Anzac Biscuits with Vegemite!)
* * *
Peter Reith just wrote that he found it hard to believe that Labor would win this week’s Victorian election, in spite of the polls having them “slightly ahead” (on average, at 54-46%). It defied “common sense” according to Mr Reith.
This morning, Victoria’s Treasurer announced that – a few weeks ago – the Liberals signed a contract for the East-West Link which would entitle the consortium to over a billion dollars, even if Labor kept their election promise and didn’t build it OR the councils opposing it blocked it in Court.
Why did they sign a contract with such a big penalty clause so close to an election?
I guess it was just common sense!