BF2S Forums Australian politics thread.

Jaekus wrote:

I think they know this, so they want to block her at every turn in order to later turn around and say "what has Labor done? Nothing". Except blocking everything doesn't get you into government when you yourself have nothing to offer as an alternative. What was Abbott's slogan last election? "Stop the boats, stop the taxes, stop the waste". All very well and good, but once you do that, then what?

He did something as prior to his taking the leadership the Liberals were going to get absolutely smacked at the next election. He was able to achieve the turnaround via what I think, based on the history of the party, was a simple back to basics approach.

Abbott was able to work on nostalgia, conservative voters by nature are inclined to view ‘what we had before’ was desirable. I think he reinvigorated the most committed core of the base that had rallied behind John Howard. One of the keys to the Howards philosophy was that: Menzies ‘silent majority’ of Australians in the 1950’s with no links to the union movement, had now become the ‘silenced majority’ by political correctness, Keating and the special interest groups who had infiltrated the ALP since Dunstan/Whitlam had broadened their base by brining to the forefront the new forms of oppression by the upper classes such as; race/religion/age/sex/education. Areas outside the original concerns of the working class labour movement that had originally made up its base and as it shrank had made them stay in federal opposition. Neo-liberalism had challenged the idea of the nuclear family, mum at home, 2 kids and a white picket fence (which fronted one of Howard's policy documents) yet the social conservative didn't want to budge. Country and family still remain the glue binding the individual pursuit.

Howard in key speeches made comments to the effect of: ‘we [the silent majority] don’t want to be viewed as a society with no central core or just a collection of different groups with no collective identity’ Nation and family became the neo-cons safe haven after free market economics destroyed the traditional view of the Howard family, as Waleed Aly pointed out not all conservatism can be viewed as useful, this had an impact of marginalising Muslims and other minorities who didn't fit this image rather than leading to integration behind a national identity. He pissed off the Left because his world, similar to Bush, relied on the ‘with us or against us’ idea and thus viewed all opposed to him as simply part of the ALP and their anti-establishment sympathisers. The argument always became one dimensional and his supporters therefore were tied to backing him up and the media mirror became monolithic. The ABC, known stomping ground for ex-Labor staffers, couldn’t be fully trusted, Academics living in the abstract, couldn’t be fully trusted. Unions, like the bastards who ruined his family business, were a threat to the individual aka to ‘Howard’s Battlers’.

I think the allure of Abbott over Turnbull was a further replay of these factors. The Dry’s, known at the extremities for anti-intellectualism, can’t stand the thought of being silenced in their opposition against Climate Change, sexual liberation, reconciliation with our past or the welfare state, and Turnbull did just that with his support of the ETS and dismissal of the fringe of the party (who of course had a lot more power than their size would suggest). The carbon tax is seen as simply a greenie scam to tax productive effort in the wealthy countries to give to the poorer nations, thus it was a redistribution of wealth scheme placing the burden on working families and small business, many of whom vote for both major parties and easily digested the simple soundbite ‘great big tax on everything’. Through fear of the unknown I think the seeds of doubt placed by the new ‘open church’ of the Liberals with regards to ‘believing in man made warming’ opened the door for fear to play a bigger role. Rudd's failure also.

What now....? A question to consider as the change in price of emissions flows through the economy. This question is much easier for the Greens to fathom as they believe roughly; the economy should be centrally planned or deconstructed to the local community base, we are living beyond our means, capitalism requires growth to survive putting us at odds with natural constraints and that neo-liberalism, which has really kicked off since the 1970’s, is completely to blame and they have the remedy, economics can't be viewed as the primary concern. The Dry’s hear this message much louder than the mainstream of Australia and pull the Liberals further away from the centre.

I do wonder if the issue with Turnbull was that he was; not a good enough politician, or that he was too moderate. It’s a bit like the greens/ALP scenario when assuming he is too moderate. Those further to the extremities of the Liberal party won’t be moving across to the ALP anytime soon, but they will use their influence via the right-wing think tanks (e.g. the IPA, loosely known as the institute of p**** and a********) to hijack the opinion pages of the papers and look to wedge voters.

Since the merge of the Protectionists and the Free Traders the ‘Liberals’ have agreed on a few things:
a) By right they are the most fit to run the country, in the 1920’s they felt that the labor man was barely fit to handle his pay check, let alone the finances of the country. Therefore they would likely take a path of mismanagement and corruption. Still a key method Liberal attack to this day. Waste, deficits, Keating’s Piggery, Whitlam and the budget, Ute-gate and jobs for the boys.
b) As a result of this, the ends justify the means, they are inclined to polemic attacks as the most important thing is that they regain power and manage the country from there. Such is their greater ability to unashamedly lie to the electorate and also oppose many labor ideas, justifying it by their better ability to run the economy in the longer term.

Abbott since his days as a wet blanket at university knows this message all too well.

AussieReaper wrote:

This is going to make Abbott look even more of a goose.

He doesn't believe in climate change.

AussieReaper wrote:

War Man wrote:

AussieReaper wrote:

This is going to make Abbott look even more of a goose.

He doesn't believe in climate change.

Sounds cool, I don't believe in man-caused global warming.

We know. You were home schooled.

Last edited by War Man (2011-02-26 23:46:46)