Australia’s (in)decision 2010 and the Left

Bob de Bilde 24, August, 2010

I am a disillusioned lefty. I was a strong left wing idealist & in some areas remain so. In 2007 I saw in Kevin Rudd a new Australian statesman. He came across as the nice version of John Howard, having the same sensibly policies in many areas but willing to do the nice things little Johnny wouldn’t. Since that time I have become increasingly disillusioned with Labor & the left as a whole. The results of the recent 2010 federal election suggests that Australia is at a divide. Over 5% of the vote was informal. This is a huge number compared to previous elections & I very much doubt it being the “Mark Latham Factor” inspired. Australian’s don’t know who to trust or who is more deserving of their vote. The big winners of this lack of trust were the Greens, reaping a mighty harvest of disillusioned Labor voters (primarily) & the unsure swinging voter. Hopefully Australia will learn a quick lesson about voting Green. It won’t actually help. The Greens are like watermelons, green on the outside & Red on the inside. When I say Red I mean radical far left. The Greens are easily the least practical party of the lot.

Now I’m all for conserving the environment. My father brought me up to have deep respect & care for environmental conservation. My Grand Father was a committed recycler & reuser, keeping stuff in case it might come in handy. This had been instilled in me since I was a boy & I hold to this with great conviction. But The Greens are a party that I simply can’t vote for, they are an insult to my intelligence & to freedom of choice. The Greens draw people in on their environmental platform, while never fully explaining any of their other policies. My father worked for the Environment Protection Agency for many years in waste management & green house gas projects. He is vehemently opposed to the Greens due to their lack of thought on the impact of their policy, which is simple built around good intentions. Australia would effectively have no mining, no fishing & limited agriculture so effectively no income. Income that would be needed to fund the pipe dreams they peddle.

Furthermore their education policy is a complete joke, lacking any real thought other than that or Red Ideology. Ending funding to private & independent schools, that is their policy. It will be a disaster. You’ll have school fees rocket up which leads to parents have less choice about their kids education as more people would not be able to afford to send their kids to these schools. . This combined with schools or other organisation not being able to employ people who share their ethos & beliefs. Again undermines freedom of choice when it comes parents educating their children. In Britain they’ve found that after they shut down the grammar schools there was less social class movement. They killed the only part of the education system that really worked.

The people who I know who voted Green, did so primarily out of either apathy and disillusionment with to the major parties. A friend & I explained to a friend who voted Green about their majorly flawed education policy and touched on some other policies. My friend was shocked. People don’t or didn’t know what they were voting for. They only knew what they weren’t voting for. Which brings me to the crux of what Australia now has as the balance of power (in the senate).

Put simply I believe that the populist left, more specifically the Green movement, is Maternal Totalitarianism. Backed by the hell hath no fury firepower of the old school hard left, the FemiNAZI & Homosexual lobby. This is totalitarianism with a (stealthy) smiling face. As opposed to the old school (Paternal) Fascism, jack boot on the face, beat you into submission style. Maternal Fascism wears you down into submission threw nice warm fluffy laws that proclaim a “good” while undermining the conventional laws that has stood up to oppression. The Human Rights commissions sound nice & like they’ll standing up for what’s right But here a two examples:

1) Author Mark Steyn on trial in Canada for criticizing Islam, more specifically on trial for ‘supposed’ hate speech. Mark Styen has not called for a radical Spanish style inquisition to purge the west of Islam. He merely highlights the existing & growing issues the West is having with Islam. In 2008 He’d been cleared of hate speech but the damage has been done. Who would want the trouble of expressing ones thought out heartfelt concerns when you could be put on trial for “hate speech”. The Human Rights Commission is a waste of taxpayers money in the unachievable quest to rid the world of hate. A bunch of public servants trying to justify their existence by ‘serving’ the public good. I agree with Andrew Bolt’s take on this farce that “One cure for this cancer, of course, is to make the Canadian Islamic Council pay the costs of its attempt to kill free speech – and pay so much that it learns that free speech is a lot, lot cheaper and healthier than expensive censorship.”

2) A Shopping Centre is private property, I’ve heard of a case in the ACT where the centre has been told that they can’t refuse entry to a person who has been caught, tried & proven of stealing. This is madness, all because this is a supposed violation of human rights. I’m sorry but what about the rights of the  community to be protected from that element of society. Are they not Human too?

Saying the phrases “Human Rights” & “to end discrimination” are more and more coming to mean the same thing sorts of things as the Despotic state that calls itself a “Democratic Peoples Republic”. It’s all about appearances and not about actual substance or results. To disagree with the nice warm fluffy feeling left (who’s Australian pin up is the Greens) is effectively thought crime and make you an uncaring, unthinking (male chauvinist if a male or heartless bitch traitor if female – coz all feminist are left winger now aren’t they?). Where to be Green is to be ‘good’ & to be even slightly conservative is the greatest sin anyone can make. It’s the easiest thing in the world to proclaim a good.

Now I’m sure a fair few people wont agree with what I’ve written. That’s fine. Write it off as a misguided rant, of a disillusioned lefty. If anyone finds something like what I have just written offensive & flags it, this is the type of thing that is slowly edging & enabling us to move closer towards Maternal Totalitarianism. No one has the right to not be offended, but people do have a right to express their opinion. Don’t like someone’s views? Either ignore it or retort it. Don’t claim that you are deeply offended then run and complain to “mummy” that that person should be punished for hurting your feelings. A part of tolerance is being able to cope when someone grates against your views. That is the beauty of the Westminster argumentative from of government, impassioned discourse over legislation to get the best outcome for the Nation. Know when to compromise and know when to hold out. Hopefully I’m wrong  about what the Greens & what they will do with the balance of power. But I have a feeling their agenda may be their downfall. Only time will the Greens go the way of the Democrats?

One comment on “Australia’s (in)decision 2010 and the Left”

  • Aractus says:

    The informal vote is high as a by-product of mandatory voting. I don’t appreciate informal voting, Australia is a democracy. If you don’t want to live in a democracy there are plenty of totalitarian states you can “live” in. That aside I think it’s interesting a lot of people are saying we are “divided”, but really such a result only really speaks out in favour of centre politics; if you’re asking me.

    Howard made mistakes – what Prime Minister hasn’t? Gillard and Rudd made innumerable mistakes in the last three years of government. They only achieved three of their ’07 election promises (correct me if I’m wrong): 1. revert Workchoices –> “workchoices lite”; 2. apologize to the Stolen Generation (even though the Poms still haven’t!); 3. sign Kyoto.

    The agenda of the Greens in their polices is most felt in the country. What is this recommendation to end mulesing anyway? Do you think the idiots who come up with those polices have any idea of what flystrike is like? Or better still, the abolishment of sow pens. Because it’s inhumane to protect sows from anti-social swine behaviour? Both are done solely for the welfare of the animals, and left lunatics come in and say “no, that’s inhumane you can’t do that”.

    You are indeed right that the Greens are guilty of idealistic nonsense. But then so is PETA and I’m pretty sure most PETA supporters aren’t aware of their real agenda and ideals. can only be described as an anti-Christian website, from your “warm, fuzzy” PETA loyalists.

Make a Comment

Hey! Pay Attention: