| For the first time in years, I once again feel proud to be Australian. For years I have felt embarrassed to be part of a society that invades, expels, lacks compassion and is detached by its "leaders". What has saddened me more, though, has been our apathy to allow all this to come about. Yesterday in Melbourne our Australia returned. Welcome back. -- Jason den Hollander, letter to The Age, 16 November 2005. | "They haven't even got a majority of the union movement membership to turn up, let alone anything more than a fraction of the Australian workforce. The fact is that well over 95 per cent of the Australian work force have completely ignored this so-called day of protest." -- Peter Hendy, ACCI Chief, quoted in The Age, 16 November 2005. |
To begin with, let's break down Hendy's "95 per cent" thusly: those who supported the rally but whose work involving patient care required them to remain on duty; those who supported the rally but were too snowed under with overwork to take a minute off; those who supported the rally but never take part in them; those who supported the rally but were afraid of employer reprisals; those who have no idea what is going on in the world; those who support the legislation.
With the opening round of massive opposition to the IR legislation behind us (but squarely in front of the Howard Government), now is as good a time as any to reiterate the incredible fragmentation in the minds of so many human beings the world over: support at the ballot box for politicians they innately despise.
Taking Australia as an example, we have a significant majority that supports John Howard. Yet, when they go to the movies, it is precisely the likes of John Howard whom they boo and hiss.
Look at Peter Hendy. The Chief of the Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry, Hendy is all over the media these days touting Howard's IR deforms.
But when you listen to his voice, you hear the slithery, slimy voice of the master arrogantly dismissing the concerns of his servants.
You hear this dismissive disdain for the masses in the voices of Peter Costello, Alexander Downer, Kevin Andrews and the like.
There is another voice associated with this view: the pinched, almost strangled voice of pure hatred. Listen to Wilson Tuckey, Amanda Vanstone and the talkback callers on right wing radio.
Howard and his henchmen are unable to disguise their misanthropy, let alone a sniggering contempt for the people who support their policies. Remember John Howard's whopper Freudian slip in Parliament when he referred to voters as mugs?
It is a despairing irony that the everyday citizen who clearly perceives the difference between good and evil on the screen cannot do so when it comes to electing leaders who will literally determine their quality of life.
It's true that a film can crystallise this difference because there are no distractions. Real life is nothing but distractions; only with critical thought and a predisposition to compassion can this vital distinction be maintained.
In real life, some people effectively "lose their mind" by swallowing the transparent lies of the political equivalent of the cattle baron who by day is an upright citizen but by night sends his gang to rustle everyone's cattle, or the land baron who sends his thugs to terrorise homesteaders whose pitiful bit of property is in the way of his massive land grab, or the Mafia don who orders assassinations over nonpayment of a few dollars, or his legal equivalent, the businessman with the heart of mould who treats his employees as fodder and/or knowingly sells faulty or outmoded products to unwitting customers, or the real estate salesmen who ramps up auction prices using false bidders, or the rapacious leader of one country who invades another under false pretences in order to obtain that nation's riches, or most obviously, the sneering, corrupt politician.
Were anyone to view a film -- not a documentary, but a film with a fictional screenplay -- that depicted even one tenth the corruption, incompetence and downright criminal behavior of a government like John Howard's, they could not possibly walk out of the theatre with anything but outrage.
Yet a John Howard is precisely whom they vote for come election time.
This enormous schizoid chasm between realities is indicative of people who are unable to pay attention long enough to assess situations important to their long term well being, people who have no capacity for critical thought and so are forcing others who can to do their thinking for them, to ultimately save them from themselves. Perhaps this is the source of right wing hatred of the left. The left thinks about everything, the right only thinks of itself. Those on the right know down deep that they have opted for superficial lives. When this realisation surfaces, it's time for baseball bats and death squads. Or the re-election of spiritual pygmies like John W. Howard and George W. Bush.
Hello, is this the definition of the Silent Majority? The eternal demographic of whom Jesus H. Christ was speaking when he asked His Nibs to "forgive them for they know not what they do?"
The next time you hear someone pushing the line that some huge per cent of the population agrees with this Prime Minister, remember that similar population percentages applied to support for the most infamous tyrants in history.
And the next time you wake up to the sun shining in your window causing you to expound on the beauty of the day, remember that this beautiful planet is populated by dingbats, by people who are psychologically undisturbed by anything, especially tyranny.
Most of what you say is correct. I'm not sure that the average voter doesn't ponder on policies and political actions. I often think that the voter is so tied to debt that to entertain any idea of voting for an alternative economic policy, however small the difference, is far too scary. Hence the tactic of the Conservatives which continues to work. Howard and his predecessors merely have raised the spectre of Labor as economically 'wobbly' for the obedient little blue soldiers to run back to the fold.
On the point of 'The Left' in politics, your comment that the Left thinks about most things is true but lost entirely on the Conservatives. The Right propagandists, the tripe writer Janet Albrechsten comes to mind, have little idea what the term might mean. To them 'The Left' is some pathological state of anarchy or moronic self delusion or anti everything. I started my politics somewhere in the middle, supporting the DLP...but I was naive then in 1964. Since then I have moved ever farther to the so called Left. Someone like Alan Jones sees Stalin, Pol Pot, the Left and Communism as essentially all the same... to be feared, derided and loathed. For me Stalin and his imitators were Fascists and Communism has never be tried on anything like a broad scale. I am a firm beliver in many of the things we take for granted, such as free enterprise, the rule of law, Parliamentary democracy and I see them as part and parcel of my Left view of the world. However I am against Capitalism since it has no inherent self control over its endless expansion and exploitation.
I don't recall that I somehow instinctively hated John Howard at the start; but there is no denying that the more I see of that bastard the warmer my hatred grows. The man is a consumate liar, an abject appologist for Corporatism and a menace fo democracy and Liberty. The fact that I loathe this "skid marks on the underpants of Australian politics" does not prevent me from due debate and discussion on the more impelling issues of our time.
Paddy Forsayeth
Posted by Paddy Forsayeth on November 17, 2005