urchin

how long will julia remain

253 posts in this topic

Ahhh NO!

Politicians are human beings. Faulty creatures.

Our brains grew beyond our natural instincts, and we have this belief that we are beyond nature!

Its a bit like this forum.

Everything is political, and everyone is trying to identify everyone else's hidden agenda. (Which of course is hidden!)

But in our case, as we can regularly see, we put some comment on here, and it is guaranteed that someone else will disagree with it.

Some will even disagree with what I've just written.

So then I am left with two choices.

Dispute their disagreement with my point of view, and stand my ground.

Or;

Change my view to synthesise their view with mine. Arrive at a new place.

There seems to be this mindset that once you say something, you can't ever change it.

But if life is a learning experience surely that is the basis of it - that you are forever changing/expanding your mind.

In an adversarial parliamentary system like we have now, each party is looking for the knock-out blow, instead of trying to combine their collective intellects for a better corporate position.

Well that's MY opinion, at this point.

No criticism sol. Your posts are generally well considered. :) Respect.

My point was simply that there isn't a lot of daylight between the two sides on the provision of stimulus. It is very difficult to provide stimulus in an effective way without it being abused by shonky operators. People who wouldn't dream of stealing from their neighbours/other individuals happily steal from the government (their fellow taxpayers). I'm not sure why.

It is vaguely amusing to read the comments sections in the papers. Lots of rusted on opinions Labor bad vs Liberal good comments and vice versa. Most of the comments are astroturfing by party members. For every example anyone throws up I think I can come up with a counter example from recent history. I actually prefer to remain non-partisan as much as possible and stick to discussing the policies. It's more productive.

I don't always achieve this aim as I too am a faulty creature. Very faulty some would argue. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The speech on Monday night was written in the frame of mind of "We are going to win and I better have some rebuttal quotes for when we do it and the opposition calls us for lying".

Now I think the strategies are changing.

If the coalition wins then they can't have too many bad quotes lying around, they need nuanced views to get them out of question time alive. The recent carbon tax thing has shown that. Every time the coalition says "you lied" Gillard has said "we did exactly what you supported, why you bitchin'?" (Incidentally as someone that watches ABC News 24 close enough to 12 hours a day I probably see way too much question time - Gillard was always pretty damn awesome at it - I think her problem was taking that reality and exposing it to the media).

But if they lose then they have to stick to the simplistic analysis because if Hockey says "Yeah we would do stimulus" then the only argument against Labour government doing it is "oh we would have done it differently". And those bits of question time never ever make the news.

I don't mind Gillard and can't understand level of vitriol. She is no more economical with the truth than Howard with his "non core promises", Rudd with his "I'll never challenge again" or Abbott with his "if it ain't written down then you can't count on what I say" remark. That doesn't mean I endorse all of her policies of course. Some of them were outright dumb. Some I thought were brave.

I'm not sure I like the idea that the media is constantly looking for gotchas. I watch a fair bit of ABC news 24 (no where near 12 hours a day - my hat is off to you for enduring that much repetition :flex: ) and they do cover the entire speeches of both sides unfiltered. The reduction of complex arguments to a 10 second grab on the nightly news is open to manipulation.

I've seen comprehensive policy speeches completely ignored by journalists only interested in asking leadership questions. That annoys me. The trouble is that I don't know that the media are incorrect in their assessment of what people want to hear. Most people I meet that aren't close friends aren't interested nor capable of an in depth discussion of the merits of policy. Therefore the poll driven reactionary policy seems destined to continue.

Vested interests are increasingly capturing the debate as they realise they can influence the public mood by appealing to the baser instincts of the population. Maybe it's always been thus however I can't help feeling it is becoming more prevalent as the media battles for market share in an increasingly competitive market. The diversity of views has probably increased overall with blogging but the concentration of mainstream media sources seems to me to have decreased.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now