A crucial step in the growth of LNP hubris was the defeat of the Voice referendum. The outcome was the perfectly predictable result of the one-size-fits-all negative strategy “if you don’t know, vote No”, aided by an appallingly weak campaign from Albanese*. But having won on the “Don’t Know” vote, the LNP convinced themselves that they had mobilised an anti-woke majority. #auspol
* who in turn was massively overconfident because of Labor’s win in the Aston by-election
Having the referedum then was a mistake. There was and allways will be an urgency for full indigenous recognition, they knew one track Dutton, they knew the precedent of Abbott, they knew the referendum was a one hit opprtunity but they went ahead.
And the arrogance of not seeking discussion with the well disposed shadow min fir indigenous affairs, Julian Leeser, when bipartisan support was essential
Unfortunately Albanese had already promised Indigenous groups, including the Uluru mob, that he would progress the referendum in his first term. Because of its potential for division, and with a particularly hostile leadership on the conservative side, it never stood a chance unless Albanese was prepared to give it full-throated support. And he wasn't prepared to jeopardise his lead in the polls to do that. Well his polls dived anyway, and it's only been the chance timing of the ascension of Trump that has saved him.
I now think 'Yctwiarr' refers to Tim Dunlop's second last paragraph, "You can't tread water in a raging river". (Why highlight that paragraph in this way? I don't have simple hypotheses.)
Which must be why we recognise a book as a classic - the ones which make plain the verities of our world no matter the era - Murasaki Shikibu, Chaucer, Shakespeare, J. Austen - or Eric Blair... or in this case - Tim Dunlop...
Hit the nail right on the head again, Tim. Think I'll send this straight to AA as I'm in his electorate. We really want some action (and we need it too). Thanks Tim.
For me TD with what you write here would be a disaster: 'If the recent opinion polls are right, that estimation is proving to be correct, and it seems Labor will manage to hang onto a majority'. We/Australia is running out of time to address the totality of issues that need addressing - ecological collapse, housing, inequality, defence/AUKUS etc etc really can't wait. Another 3 years of dilly-dalliance would be a great diservice to younger people who will be inheriting this s***-show as boomers exit stage left.
What I would like to see even starting now is a big focus on the big con being orchestrated by the duopoly and their enablers the MSM. It would be an honest discussion on how the duopoly is about careers and career politicians, corporations and the corporatisation of Australian politics. I may have this totally wrong and researchers who study this stuff may have convincing arguments that the 2party system is the best way to effect fair governance of Australia.
In closing would I be correct in surmising that there is a certain amount of nostalgia for the 2parties : 'trend away from the major parties will continue and extinction is waiting'.
This almost seems that there is advice they should take on board to avoid oblivion? Could it be that the 2party system could still work if we had leaders and parties who heed; 'key to political longevity is the humility of genuine deliberation'. Genuinely interested in exploring this. Cheers
Good points, GM, and good questions. I'm a bit tempted to write a defence of the duopoly system, just to acknowledge the argument in its favour (I've been taking notes on those who defend it). But I really think it's had its day, for reasons I've mentioned in other pieces, that it no longer reflects the structure of our society. But it is also a case--and I will write about this--that it represents a triumph of "behaviour" over "action" (in Arendt's sense). That is, the parties are tools for complacency and the status quo and stand against our ability to achieve goals through coordinated planning and deliberative change. Stay tuned!
I'm still slightly gunshy from a couple of earlier elections we thought were in the bag – Abbott and Morrison – to be completely confident this time. And, as you imply, a Labor majority isn't too much better than a LNP victory, as Albo lacks the courage do do what's needed.
Yeah, this is partly why I was holding off on a full analysis, Dave. All along my take has been that predicting outcomes under circumstances where around of third of voters are, as I call it, "floating", is too risky. I don't think they are swing voters in the traditonal sense, but so much depends on what options are available in a give electorate. Part of the structural advantage the major parties retain.
If Labor form a majority and they don't adjust, it will be the biggest wasted opportunity for an allegedly progressive party in our history. Maybe Labor can adapt; I doubt Albanese can.
Was just wondering why with the death of another Pope focusses the christian world on peace and coming together when the christian warlords of the world continue to kill
Our political class have lost the plot on who and why they represent. We the citizens of this wonderful land need leaders who have an affinity with the country first and foremost then the environment, family and community
we need a leader who loves his country and all its people and tells the truth and lives it
A crucial step in the growth of LNP hubris was the defeat of the Voice referendum. The outcome was the perfectly predictable result of the one-size-fits-all negative strategy “if you don’t know, vote No”, aided by an appallingly weak campaign from Albanese*. But having won on the “Don’t Know” vote, the LNP convinced themselves that they had mobilised an anti-woke majority. #auspol
* who in turn was massively overconfident because of Labor’s win in the Aston by-election
Having the referedum then was a mistake. There was and allways will be an urgency for full indigenous recognition, they knew one track Dutton, they knew the precedent of Abbott, they knew the referendum was a one hit opprtunity but they went ahead.
And the arrogance of not seeking discussion with the well disposed shadow min fir indigenous affairs, Julian Leeser, when bipartisan support was essential
Unfortunately Albanese had already promised Indigenous groups, including the Uluru mob, that he would progress the referendum in his first term. Because of its potential for division, and with a particularly hostile leadership on the conservative side, it never stood a chance unless Albanese was prepared to give it full-throated support. And he wasn't prepared to jeopardise his lead in the polls to do that. Well his polls dived anyway, and it's only been the chance timing of the ascension of Trump that has saved him.
Good point about the referendum. It's a perfect example of hubris.
Yctwiarr Love it!
“Yctwiarr”??
I think Peter S is inviting us to fit the words to his anagram. e.g. Might it be "You Can Tell When I Am Revolutionary Ready"!
I now think 'Yctwiarr' refers to Tim Dunlop's second last paragraph, "You can't tread water in a raging river". (Why highlight that paragraph in this way? I don't have simple hypotheses.)
AA: Bravo! You figured it out! I think PS was maybe trying for economy in his posting? And what a metaphor from PL, eh?!!!
Yes.
That line moved around a lot during the editing, but I think it found its rightful place!
In total agreement - you write the words already lying as the railway tracks in my head!
So beautifully said Jim. I agree with you. Winston Smith says to himself in 1984, the best books are the ones that tell you what you already know.
Which must be why we recognise a book as a classic - the ones which make plain the verities of our world no matter the era - Murasaki Shikibu, Chaucer, Shakespeare, J. Austen - or Eric Blair... or in this case - Tim Dunlop...
Appreciate that, Jim, thanks.
Hit the nail right on the head again, Tim. Think I'll send this straight to AA as I'm in his electorate. We really want some action (and we need it too). Thanks Tim.
Action is the key word, Deb. See what I said in reply to Gavin. More to come.
For me TD with what you write here would be a disaster: 'If the recent opinion polls are right, that estimation is proving to be correct, and it seems Labor will manage to hang onto a majority'. We/Australia is running out of time to address the totality of issues that need addressing - ecological collapse, housing, inequality, defence/AUKUS etc etc really can't wait. Another 3 years of dilly-dalliance would be a great diservice to younger people who will be inheriting this s***-show as boomers exit stage left.
What I would like to see even starting now is a big focus on the big con being orchestrated by the duopoly and their enablers the MSM. It would be an honest discussion on how the duopoly is about careers and career politicians, corporations and the corporatisation of Australian politics. I may have this totally wrong and researchers who study this stuff may have convincing arguments that the 2party system is the best way to effect fair governance of Australia.
In closing would I be correct in surmising that there is a certain amount of nostalgia for the 2parties : 'trend away from the major parties will continue and extinction is waiting'.
This almost seems that there is advice they should take on board to avoid oblivion? Could it be that the 2party system could still work if we had leaders and parties who heed; 'key to political longevity is the humility of genuine deliberation'. Genuinely interested in exploring this. Cheers
Good points, GM, and good questions. I'm a bit tempted to write a defence of the duopoly system, just to acknowledge the argument in its favour (I've been taking notes on those who defend it). But I really think it's had its day, for reasons I've mentioned in other pieces, that it no longer reflects the structure of our society. But it is also a case--and I will write about this--that it represents a triumph of "behaviour" over "action" (in Arendt's sense). That is, the parties are tools for complacency and the status quo and stand against our ability to achieve goals through coordinated planning and deliberative change. Stay tuned!
get cracking TD - I look forward to that. Cheers
I'm still slightly gunshy from a couple of earlier elections we thought were in the bag – Abbott and Morrison – to be completely confident this time. And, as you imply, a Labor majority isn't too much better than a LNP victory, as Albo lacks the courage do do what's needed.
Yeah, this is partly why I was holding off on a full analysis, Dave. All along my take has been that predicting outcomes under circumstances where around of third of voters are, as I call it, "floating", is too risky. I don't think they are swing voters in the traditonal sense, but so much depends on what options are available in a give electorate. Part of the structural advantage the major parties retain.
I have a hope that Albo has been planning to change his target in this next election and throws away his support for Big Business.
That *would* be nice!
If Labor form a majority and they don't adjust, it will be the biggest wasted opportunity for an allegedly progressive party in our history. Maybe Labor can adapt; I doubt Albanese can.
Gday Tim
another great Piece, thank you.
Was just wondering why with the death of another Pope focusses the christian world on peace and coming together when the christian warlords of the world continue to kill
Putin , Trump and old genocidal Netan yahoo
I dont get it mate
Love to all
Our political class have lost the plot on who and why they represent. We the citizens of this wonderful land need leaders who have an affinity with the country first and foremost then the environment, family and community
we need a leader who loves his country and all its people and tells the truth and lives it
good luck
Tim, this is exactly what I would have hoped to have said, except that my aged concentration tends to get lost after ten or twenty words ...