Wednesday, December 4, 2024

Politics, Strategy, Campaigns, Elections

Home Politics, Strategy, Campaigns, Elections Page 7

Join Me On The Watchlist

In my previous article, I asked readers to consider making a submission to the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) regarding the draconian Misinformation Bill. I have always been sceptical of the effect of such submissions, but it is hard for government to fly in the face of overwhelming public backlash.

Politicians, like prostitutes, are in the business of pleasing people and, while that continues, there is value in protests, petitions, submissions and all manner of public dissent.

While I completely understand the hesitation of many people to engage with the government any more than they absolutely must, there is one motivation we should never allow the government to use to manipulate us: fear.

THE BATTLELINES HAVE ALREADY BEEN DRAWN

For those who are too scared to be public with your dissent for fear of retribution, I am sorry to break it to you: it’s too late.

The battlelines have already been drawn. If you think you will be spared from a murderous and reprehensible entity with unlimited resources that it can steal with impunity because of your ‘anonymous’ social media account or refusing to submit your dissent to impending legislation, I have a bridge to sell you.

For many years I watched politics and culture from the sidelines: I had strong opinions, but they were only uttered among the safety of family and close friends. After the novelty of social media had worn off in my late teenage years, I barely posted anything. I always removed myself from photos that were likely to find their way online and maintained a very private life. My online persona, or lack thereof, was unusual for someone my age.

But then Covid happened.

DIE ON YOUR FEET

Before I decided to run for public office in the 2022 South Australian election, I thought a lot about the implications of my political ‘coming out’. Would I still be able to find a job? Would I lose friends? Would this be used against me? But the reality is, that kind of thinking was a selfish luxury. And in the harsh light of the tyrannical Covid response, it didn’t matter anymore.

Tyrannical Covid-19 Response

Who cares about a job when your dollar can’t buy you anything?

Who cares about friends when you can never trust anyone?

Who cares about anything being used against you when you’re already living in a free-range prison?

While we are still a long way away from dystopia, it is coming faster than you think. And totalitarian government only seeks one thing: more power. It will leverage the useful idiots, those who have honest intent but are not aware of the authoritarian intentions of the policy they advocate, until they are no longer useful – then it will throw them aside. No one is safe from authoritarianism, whether you dissent publicly or not.

While Emiliano Zapata is generally considered a socialist, we can still learn from his ethos: ‘It is better to die on your feet than live on your knees.’

LIVE FREE OR DIE

The reality is, we are faced with two options: live a short and miserable existence in silence, until the authoritarians have rendered you useless, or speak up and fight back!

If you speak up and fight back, I cannot promise you that your existence won’t be just as short, but it will be far more rewarding. And maybe, just maybe, if we all speak up loudly enough and fight back hard enough, we will all exist to (not) fight the next battle.

I do not fear being put on a watchlist. I embrace it!

Live free or die because death is not the worst of evils.

Trial The Voice At The ALP National Conference

Here’s a great idea. The Albanese government could trial the ‘Voice to Parliament’ by enlisting Aboriginal representatives to attend the national ALP Conference commencing in Brisbane on 17 August. The Prime Minister already has a posse ready to go, the members of his referendum working group, most of whom would be very familiar with ALP National conferences. Indeed, I observed a young Marcia Langton at the 1982 conference in Canberra having a very robust debate with delegates.

The Aboriginal delegates could have a right to advise on all motions of concern put to the conference. This may extend the conference by several weeks, but it would be an excellent opportunity for Labor to demonstrate how the Voice would work should Australia vote yes in the forthcoming referendum.

With the Conference dominated by left delegates, they would be falling over themselves to agree with whatever proposals the Aboriginal delegates would put to the floor. After day one, the Aboriginal delegates, emboldened, would put increasingly contentious proposals to the conference – what fun.

The 49th Australian Labor Party National Conference is the first National Conference in Queensland since the 1970s. Labor was then in the grips of the ‘old guard’, union officials in brown cardigans, intent on controlling all conversations, to the extent there were any. It was a dark and antidemocratic time for Labor.

Australian Labor Party National Conference

Much of the party’s electoral and policy history since has been far more open and enlivened, which is good. Its recent obsession with identity politics which will see it destroy its otherwise firm grip on reality, is bad.

This is most evident in Aboriginal policy.

The 2023 draft platform contains the oft repeated statement by the Prime Minister, “Labor supports the implementation of the Uluru Statement from the Heart in full, beginning with enshrining an Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice in the Australian Constitution.

To nail the lid on the coffin, the draft platform also reads, “Labor supports all elements of the Uluru Statement from the Heart, including a constitutionally enshrined Voice to Parliament, a Makarrata Commission for agreement-making and a national process of truth-telling. Labor will take steps to implement all three elements of the Uluru Statement from the Heart in this term of government.”

But there is more. Labor commits to “a standalone piece of cultural heritage legislation.” Having leaned on the West Australian Labor government to withdraw its cultural heritage legislation, at least for the course of the referendum campaign, Federal Labor has vowed to step in to fill the gap. West Australian voters’ anger at the heritage legislation will become Australia’s anger. This is not a smart move. It is the opposite of Bob Hawke’s retreat from national land rights legislation under pressure from West Australian Premier Brian Burke in the 1980s. This time Federal Labor wants to double down on the foolishness.

The Uluru Statement From The Heart

A further disquieting step is “co-design” of “legislative reform, policy transformation, administrative improvement and governance”. It should be clear by now that the last 25 years in Aboriginal affairs has been an exercise in co-design. That is why there is a gap that needs closing. Aboriginal ownership and voice has ensured the livelihoods of university graduates of Aboriginal descent. It has locked poorly educated, non-integrated, Aborigines out of the market economy and the open society.

For example, Labor believes that “First Nations people have a right to live on their traditional lands. Labor also believes that it is crucial that “remote communities have essential services and are empowered to participate in the design and provision of those services as genuine partners”. All very well, but who pays for this ‘right’?  

Labor also asserts that “Strong cultural identity is essential to the health, social and emotional well-being of First Nations people.” Sorry, the evidence does not exist. Aboriginal-controlled services assert such things, they never prove it.

On one point we can agree. Labor believes what constitutes an ‘indigenous business’ should be re-defined to protect against ‘black cladding’ and ensure meaningful employment for workers. Who is game to ask who is an Aborigine?

I would be proud of the Labor party if they announced at the conference, ‘No race based policies by 2030’. Delegates of any background could have their vote and voice. Such egalitarian claims used to be the stuff of the old Labor party. Alas, it is no longer.

Gary Johns is the author of The Burden of Culture (Quadrant books) and a former Minister in the Keating government.

The New Gulag

Neil Oliver

In his famous three-volume masterpiece, The Gulag Archipelago, Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn described the frozen wastelands of Siberia where political prisoners and dissidents the Soviet state considered dangerous were held (for their speech, not their actions). A gulag was a Soviet prison; an archipelago is a string of islands; hence the term ‘gulag archipelago’ – a string of camps, prisons, transit centres, secret police, informers, spies and interrogators across Siberia.

Today, people are frozen out of society in more subtle ways. The authorities no longer bash down your door and haul you off to a gulag for espousing the ‘wrong views’; instead, they silence and freeze you out of existence in other ways.

No-one describes the current situation better than Scottish commentator Neil Oliver in his Essentials of Life video clip here. More about that shortly.

Divide and conquer

As we know, the Left’s chief weapon is division. Unite the disaffected groups and those with grievances, and then ‘divide and conquer’ the rest of us. Divide along racial, generational, sexual, religious or economic lines. Any line will do.

What may have started as ‘the workers vs the bosses’ – ‘the proletariat vs the bourgeoisie’ – and ‘supporting the poor’, became just a ruse to gain power. Workers and the poor have long since been abandoned by the Left who now find other ways to divide and conquer.

In his excellent book, Democracy in a Divided Australia, Matthew Lesh writes:

Australia has a new political, cultural, and economic elite. The class divides of yesteryear have been replaced by new divisions between Inners and Outers. This divide is ripping apart our political parties, national debate, and social fabric.

Inners are highly educated inner-city progressive cosmopolitans who value change, diversity, and self-actualisation. Inners, despite being a minority, dominate politics on both sides, the bureaucracy, universities, civil society, corporates, and the media. They have created a society ruled by educated elites – that is, ruled by themselves.

Outers are the instinctive traditionalists who value stability, safety, and unity. Outers are politically, culturally, and economically marginalised in today’s graduate-dominated knowledge society era. Their voice is muzzled in public debate, driving disillusionment with the major parties, and record levels of frustration, disengagement, and pessimism.

For over a hundred years, Australia fought to remove race from civic considerations. Yet now we are being asked to permanently divide the nation by entrenching an Indigenous Voice into our Constitution. By the ‘Inners’, of course.

In the workplace, politicians are still treating workplace behaviour like a game of football. Australia’s employers (‘the bosses’) are on one team, and Australia’s employees (‘the workers’) are on the other. The game is then overseen by a so-called ‘independent umpire’ called the Fair Work Commission. But of course, this is not how workplaces operate at all. The ‘game’, if you even want to call it that, is played not by two teams of employers and employees, but by hundreds, even thousands of different teams, competing against hundreds and thousands of other teams of employers and employees.

Mark Twain observed, “Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example”.

Here’s one – the infamous Dollar Sweets dispute where unions were picketing Fred Stauder’s confectionery business. Other confectionery businesses were approached to support Fred but were rebuffed saying, “Why should we care if Dollar Sweets goes down? It will mean more business for us.”  So much for ‘bosses vs workers’.

While paying lip service to free markets, property rights, personal responsibility, self-reliance, free speech, lower taxes, the rule of law and smaller government, the Liberal Party in Australia has all but abandoned these ideals in practice. As has big business, which, truth be known, was never on the side of free markets. Corporations have always wanted markets they can dominate, and to eliminate the competition. If that means aligning with the Left or doing the government’s bidding, so be it.

Which includes – and here we return to our ‘new gulags’ theme – closing a person’s bank account, destroying them on social media, or excluding them from employment. Business is right on board with this.

The Left will keep pushing its woke agenda until it is stopped. And it will not be stopped with facts, figures, logic, evidence or reason. It doesn’t care about any of that. It will only be stopped with political power.

Holding conferences, writing opinion pieces, producing podcasts and YouTube interviews in the hope of persuading people have, I’m afraid, had their day. The ‘Inners’ now rule.

Stopping the relentless march of the Left will require political power. Seats in parliament. Which means like-minded people and parties forming alliances and working strategically and tactically together to win seats.

In Neil Oliver’s video clip, he says, “When it comes to the state, that which it can do, it certainly will do” and “What can happen to anyone, will soon happen to everyone”.  

So, if you belong to a think-tank, lobby group or centre-right political party, and want to stop the woke Left further ruining our country, then please encourage your organisation to place less emphasis on winning arguments and more emphasis on winning seats – as previously outlined here and here.

Thank you for your support.

The Liberty Coalition is Finally (T)Here

In my first article, I discussed the disunity among the ‘freedom movement’ and the loosely aligned ‘freedom’ parties. This sparked further discussion, culminating in the beginning of a potential coalition for federal elections. While that seems to have fizzled out for now, political coalition-building and alliance-forming is gaining traction across the Pacific.

COLOARDO FOR LIBERTY

In the US state of Colorado, two unlikely bedfellows have decided that one-party Democratic rule over the State needs to end. The Colorado Libertarian Party and the Republican Party have brokered an historic agreement regarding local, state and congressional elections.

Without getting into the complexities of US electoral systems, the Libertarians have agreed not to run ‘spoiler candidates’ in many districts provided the Republicans nominate genuine “liberty-focused” candidates. Think more Ron Pauls and fewer Mitt Romneys.

This has attracted the ire of Democrat Governor Jared Polis. Following the announcement, Polis spent the next few days quoting Rothbard and Hayek, pretending to be a libertarian and obviously hoping Coloradans would have forgotten about his draconian Covid restrictions and subversive property tax increases.

Regardless of the political outcome of this alliance, the fact it has forced the establishment to compete on the principles of liberty is already a huge win.

BRINGING IT HOME

How a liberty coalition might operate in Australia has already been aptly outlined by none other than a former Senator. And unlike the US, Australia has the massive triple benefits of preferential voting, proportional voting and formal coalition tickets.

Preferential voting means there is no such thing as ‘spoiler candidates’ in our federal electoral system. Proportional voting, which is relevant in the Senate and most state-level upper houses, means the quotas required to get elected are far lower than those in the US. A formal coalition ticket is the mechanism used by the Liberal and National parties to run Senate candidates from both parties in a combined group.

party

Australia also does not have the same difficulties with ballot access for minor parties that are found in the US. In many congressional districts you will only be presented with Republican and Democrat candidates on the ballot, as they often team up to ensure few, if any, alternative candidates can even nominate.

EYES ON THE PRIZE

Of course, the Colorado announcement has not exactly gone down swimmingly with everyone. Libertarians, infamous for their hatred of each other above all else, are unsurprisingly splintered. Many are, understandably, quite hesitant about getting into bed with the ‘Diet Democrats’.

However, over time the benefits of this arrangement are becoming too hard to ignore. Principles are winning over partisanship, and now murmurs of Libertarian-Republican alliances are being heard across the US, with Minnesota apparently next in line.

The cultural shift is an even bigger win than any political outcome that might stem from this deal. The 2024 Colorado election has now turned into a referendum on who has the most libertarian values. Even more than that, liberty-minded members of both the GOP and Democrats now have the impetus to demand change within their respective parties.

The battle for liberty must be fought on all fronts, and requires the support of those working to change from within.

PRINCIPLES OVER PARTY

A lot can be learned from Colorado, and I hope others within the ‘freedom movement’ are watching this arrangement closely. Australia’s unique electoral system is the perfect opportunity to implement an even better alliance, without even needing to rely on a major party.

Not only does having the balance of power in the Senate and state upper houses provide an anchor of liberty, just as the Greens provide an anchor of socialism, but like the cultural influence from our friends in Colorado, it provides an impetus for others to begin discussing liberty in political party rooms, executive meetings and membership conferences – as well as around the dinner table.

And, as has happened in the Centennial State, perhaps all political candidates will soon be competing over who cares most about liberty.

Moira Deeming And The Shrinking Church

As former Senator David Leyonhjelm adroitly explained in his recent article Libertarians And Conservatives: Similar But Different, there are both shared interests and fundamental differences between libertarians (or classical liberals) and conservatives.

For decades, the Liberal Party sought to balance these tensions, referring to itself internally as a “broad church”. As a libertarian who was once a Young Liberal and enthusiastically involved in the Liberal Party at all levels, I took pride in feeling that (while often at the margins) there was a place for libertarian ideas alongside conservative ones.

So why is it that party members from both sides of the Liberal Party’s twin political heritage are looking at it with increasing dismay,
and abandoning it in greater numbers than ever before?

Over the past month I have heard two descriptions of the Liberal Party that were remarkably similar, from people who had not had an opportunity to compare notes.

Libertarian Party MLC John Ruddick described the modern Liberal Party as “a once great manor house, that still looks good from the outside, but has fallen into disrepair, with the carpets and curtains decaying inside”.

Less than a day later, twenty-year Liberal Party member and now a Libertarian Party member, Gideon Rozner said, “The Liberal Party today… it’s like when you go to a tennis or sports club, and the club rooms are a mess and the facilities in disrepair”.

Simply put, the Party is rapidly ceasing to exist as an entity made up of grassroots members that exist outside of parliaments.

The Moira Deeming saga epitomises the identity crisis the parliamentary Liberal Party faces.

Having lost the compass points of both libertarian and conservative values,
the modern Liberal leadership finds itself adrift in a sea of woke intersectional tides.

Pesutto, like the dying days of the Napthine government in 2014, is desperately trying to appease a vocal section of the electorate which will never vote for him no matter how much he virtue signals to win their favour.

In 2014, Denis Napthine led the Victorian Liberal Party into what was meant to be an unlosable re-election for a second term after 14 years in opposition following the defeat of Jeff Kennet in 1996.

His campaign slogan was ‘Jobs and growth’. Victorian voters were faced with a choice between Pepsi or Pepsi-Max, and perhaps unsurprisingly they chose Pepsi.

By turning a disagreement between himself and a first term backbencher into an existential challenge to his leadership, Pesutto has made it clear that the modern Liberal Party is not in the business of ideas.

Party members, libertarians and conservatives alike, rightly see Moira Deeming’s exile as a proxy for the treatment they could expect if they expressed the wrong kind of ideas, or any at all. 

As a libertarian in the Liberal Party, I used to rationalise my continued participation as “helping to make the party better” and “changing from within”. Looking back on that time honestly, I wanted to have good ideas, but wasn’t prepared to sacrifice political power or a future political career to defend them.

Several first term MLCs who were in my graduating class of Young Liberal aspiring politicians voted to expel Moira Deeming, likely not because they thought it was right but because they felt dissent would have killed their political future.

In the current state of the Liberal Party in Victoria, they were probably correct, and the lesson for grassroots members should be to seek political homes that welcome their ideas, rather than silence them. 

A secondary lesson for those outside of major party politics, is that while there is much to be gained from co-operation between those with different ideas but shared interests, there is just as much to lose by believing in nothing except winning elections.

3 Horrifying NSW election predictions

ytr

Tomorrow, New South Wales voters will choose their next government.

The winner will be the Liberal-National incumbent or the Labor insurgent.

At this point, no other party is strong enough to usurp either. They are the only options to form government.

The Liberal-National Coalition has been in power since 2011. In 12 years, they have had Premiers Barry O’Farrell, Mike Baird, Gladys Berejiklian and Dominic Perrottet. The second resigned at the top of his game and is now a middle-level manager of a bank. The first and third resigned under an ICAC cloud.

Under it’s leadership, transport services have improved dramatically. Hospitals have been adequate. School results have slowly diminished. It’s handling of covid was relatively light-touch at first, but Gladys Berekijlian requested that troops be deployed in Western Sydney to enforce covid restrictions and the Ruby Princess matter was a debacle, her government accommodated the slide towards the illiberal in education, much needed land releases were held back to keep real estate prices high, and much talent vacated the capital, Sydney.

Further, the Perrottet Government has veered dangerously towards a green tape business culture. In the dying days of this campaign, the Premier has flip-flopped on whether to keep Eraring Power Station. Debt has skyrocketed. It will take generations to repay the damage. Over the years, the clear stars have been Mike Baird and Andrew Constance, both now gone, as well as Victor Dominello who is still there.

The Labor Opposition has distance from the Eddie Obeid days. Chris Minns is a relatively unknown as Opposition Leader. He is certainly economically illiterate, not being even able to articulate a fully-funded first year budget. However, he performed the bells and baubles hustings game well in a presidential-style campaign before a friendly media. He had to do that because his shadow cabinet is obscure and without experience. On last count, there is not one MP in opposition with employing small business experience. On policies, they will certainly ramp-up the debt. But that is a bi-partisan policy.

I am ill-at-ease for my New South Welsh cousins.

They really have a tweedledum and tweedledee choice before them in terms of who forms government.

If I were a betting man, and on politics I am not because for me democracy is not a devalued commodity of a crap shoot or two-up round, I would suggest to the readers of Liberty Itch that both options represent higher taxes and lower personal freedom. I could recommend neither to you, and I am a former Young Liberal of the Year and State Executive member of the NSW Division of the Liberal Party in the 1990s.

No-one can predict the future and my track record is woeful, though I was correct with my Stunning Early Victoria Election Prediction.

However, at 6:54pm ACDT on 24 March 2023, I make three election predictions as follows:

Prediction #1: Labor will win!

Prediction #2: Labor will form majority government.

Prediction #3: Liberal will win the Legislative Assembly seat of Hornsby.

To be clear. I do not wish these results. I do predict them.

This will mean the Liberal-National Coalition will form no government on mainland Australia.

It will also mean that the Liberal-National Coalition will likely continue its current trend to electoral oblivion.

The support base for the Coalition is cleavered on the issue of climate change. It is an issue which has been fraught for many Liberal leaders for a decade. It is the equivalent of the DLP split from Labor in the 1950s which kept them out of power for twenty years.

What is for certain, NSW needs a government which keeps away from our bank accounts and out of our private lives.

It will be some time before that is a reality for the good folk of New South Wales.

8 Segments of the Democratic Right

Here’s the quick political segmentation for you to ponder.

The Australian political landscape has two overarching groups: the Extremists and the Democrats.

We must actively counter the Extremists in the public square regardless of their form or stripe. No exceptions. No nuancing or qualifying. Their idealogies are all abhorrent. This includes five sub-groups: the Communists and Socialists, the Fascists and Ethno-Nationalists, and the Militant Jihadists as well.

We don’t weaken our democracy by banning them.

No! As Democrats, we must do the hard yards engaging and countering them.

We expose their dire histories, their graphic, heinous results, their intolerance, ulterior motives and their totalitarian DNA. We reveal and mock, we eviscerate and make them look odd and utterly untempting.

We built alliances among the Democrats in this regard, we unite with them against the Extremists and focus our message towards the disenfranchised, marginalised and dispossessed so they don’t drift to the Extremists.

As and once we win, we turn next to our fellow Democrats. With our democratic fellow-travellers, we reason and convert.

Now, inside the Democrats, there are two sub-groups both with long and proud traditions. They are the Democratic Left and the Democratic Right. As the names suggest, both are democratic but of different flavours. Both are ice cream, just one is strawberry and the other chocolate. Here the flavours are more government and more freedom.

We start with our great democratic opponent, the Democratic Left. This group comprises the Social Democrats with their penchant for the welfare state in the name of compassion. They are fairly united right now, sitting inside the Australian Labour Party, the Australian Greens and Animal Justice and representing a cohesive, fighting force. If we do not impune their motives but show them the results of their policies, we might have a chance. Far more effective is that we promote policies which contrast, wedge and split them. AUKUS is emerging as a wedge issue for the Democratic Left.

History suggests it will be hard to convince them. And if that be the case, so be it.

Next, we must strengthen the Democratic Right for future battles.

So what do we discover?

Well, the Democratic Right are highly fragmented at the moment. In fact, there are 8 segments, all fairly distinct sub-sub-groups if you look hard enough but with some smudging at the edges which reveals affliation across some of the grouping and that people migrate between them.

Here are the 8 segments:

  1. The Moderates
    We’re talking here about people who self-describe as small-l philosophical liberal or modern liberal. Moderates see themselves as fiscally responsible and socially liberal. Since 2007, if loyal party members, this segment hasn’t noticed they are frogs in the slow-boiling saucepan fiscally. If new to party politics, the ranks of the Moderates now include people who have a tendency to be big government spenders rather than economically lean, and that expenditure has often been on social projects they wouldn’t have chased in the Howard years. We are talking about Liberal Party members and Teals.
  2. The Libertarians
    This group, most likely you as a reader of Liberty Itch, sometimes self-describe as classical liberal or liberal. Like the Moderates, they see themselves as fiscally responsible and socially liberal. Unlike the Moderates, the Libertarians are philosophically-driven and so their policy prescriptions are consistent and predictable. And they are very dry fiscally, to the point of reducing the size of government. This sometimes results in a doctrinaire approach and an obsession for philosophical purity tests. We are talking members of the Liberal Democrats.
  3. The Disaffected
    These people are probably ex Liberal Party supporters, probably slow to leave, currently political refugees, probably moderate, probably white collar, and looking for a new party which expresses their values. They are confused and disoriented. They are upset. They feel the political rug has been pulled from under their feet.
  4. The Populists
    Here, we’re talking probably about former Liberal Party members who self-describe as conservative but, on closer scrutiny, their views taken in total show a mixed or inconsistent framework. This inconsistency can sometimes cause them to err into dangerous territory and be drawn to a charismatic leader. They are mostly blue collar, and have already migrated to One Nation and the United Australia Party.
  5. The Conspiracy Theorists
    This segment doesn’t know which political party they belong to, are skeptical of authority, and yearn to make sense of the world. They frequently latch onto theories about globalists and global bodies but, with emerging critical reasoning skills only and craving certainty in an uncertain world, cannot discern between fact and fiction. You can find these people in any of the parties but they are particularly concentrated in Australia One and the sovereign citizen movement.
  6. The Agrarians
    This segment lives in rural areas or regional towns with a strong agricultural influence. They are conservative, but fiscally slip into protectionist economics and bigger spending rural services. They are in the National Party, Liberal Party and the Shooters Fishers and Farmers.
  7. The ConservativesAs I’ve documented, conservatives love to conserve whatever the status quo of the day. Since resistance to change is their modus operandi, the work tirelessly to halt or slow undesirable change. However, Conservatives rarely come up with new policy themselves and what they do come up with can be anti-freedom. Think bans, quick-to-judge court proceedings and higher taxes to fund conservative causes. This puts them on the back-foot constantly for lack of policy flair. You’ll find conservatives and self-described conservatives everywhere.
  8. The Christian Right
    This segment has no monopoly over right-wing Christians. The difference between the Christian Right and all other Democratic Right segments is that it is exclusively Christian and it seeks to assert Biblical authority into the state as a kind of theocracy of one potency or another. The other segments mentioned will assume a plural, secular, liberal democracy. The Christian Right is usually evangelical or orthodox, usually Pentecostal, always family-oriented. You will find members in Family First and the Australian Family Party.

The challenge for the Democratic Right is to bind these 8 segments to form a Centre-Right Coalition, win against the Democractic Left and put the Extremists out of business.

Hope! Do Not Underestimate The Good Senator From Victoria

ffd

Just when you shudder at the Treasurer’s blueprint for ‘redesigning capitalism’ and the limp response from the Coalition we have come to expect, along comes Senator Ralph Babet (UAP, Vic).

Classical liberals everywhere, take heart. There is hope that, finally, we have an advocate for our principles, and one uncaptured by the Coalition.

Straight from the Senate floor on 8 February 2023, in a speech titled Government Intervention Makes Things Worse …

Anyone with a basic understanding of economics knows that
handing-out large sums of money will destablise and manipulate the market.

Common sense, right?

Then, warming to the opportunity to let them have it, without a care how the parliamentary-careerists might react, he openly chastises the Liberal Party and National Party who took us down the wrong path …

“Never again can our country run-up such an irresponsible amount of debt
like the former Government did.”

Just in case that didn’t sit you upright and start cheering, these gems then flowed-freely in a kind of declaration of intent …

“Less stimulus. Lower taxes. If government removes financial barriers,
the market will naturally provide adequate supply
at a price acceptable to consumers.”

Well, bravo Senator. Bravo!

Now in full flight and infusing the red chamber with his particular brand of optimism, long-missed plain-speaking and unequivocal classical liberal rhetoric …

“For too long, the focus has been on government
incentivising the demand-side of the equation with taxpayer money.
It’s time to focus on the supply-side.”

If he keeps this up, the Senator will be mercilessly attacked.

That, of course, will be the sign he is threatening the cosy status-quo.

As Ralph Babet emerges as a first-time senator, it will be interesting to witness how he handles his philosophical opponents.

However, one thing is clear. Do not underestimate the good Senator from Victoria.

https://www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/7uHSl1Sglag?start=29s&rel=0&autoplay=0&showinfo=0&enablejsapi=0

When Saying “The Evidence Is Crystal Clear” Actually Means You Have No Evidence

xdd
  1. The evidence is crystal clear: the Earth is flat
  2. The evidence is crystal clear: lead pipes and drinking water go together
  3. The evidence is crystal clear: there are canals on Mars
  4. The evidence is crystal clear: thalidomide is perfectly safe
  5. The evidence is crystal clear: Elvis Presley’s death was faked
  6. The evidence is crystal clear: alien UFOs regularly fly in our skies
  7. The evidence is crystal clear: Theranos blood testing was scientifically proven
  8. The evidence is crystal clear: CCP Uyghur camps are really Club Med resorts
  9. The evidence is crystal clear: if you take the covid vaccine, you won’t get covid
    and …

Nicola Sturgeon Out!

hjk

The First Minister of Scotland, Nicola Sturgeon, has given notice of her resignation.

Foremost among her political objectives and that of her party, the Scottish National Party, was to gain independence from the United Kingdom!

Nicola Sturgeon. Resigned as Scotland’s First Minister.

Scotland and England have been in Union since 1707, by personal union of the Crown as far back as 1603. So aspiration was high, clear-headed thinkers might say unrealistically so, for a population the size of Sydney or Boston.

Her predecessor, Alex Salmond, won handsomely in the 2011 election, a result sufficient to pressure Westminster for a referendum on independence in 2014.

The YES Campaign of that referendum was led by Ms. Sturgeon and resulted in a majority of Scottish residents rejecting a breakaway from the United Kingdom.

Damaged by the implications of that result, it was Mr. Salmond who ended his decade-long leadership of the Scottish National Party and the lacklustre performer, Ms. Sturgeon, was elevated to the top job.

This past performance should have been the harbinger of her subsequent eight year premiership.

Her failure to replicate Mr. Salmond’s 2011 result meant securing a second referendum was always going to be fraught. It didn’t help that her predecessor left the Scottish National Party to lead another pro-independence party, Alba, in 2021.

Now in coalition with the Scottish Greens, she had the Scottish Parliament declare a referendum date after political maneuverings and repeated petitions to Westminster failed. The brazen, ultra vires move was struck down by the United Kingdom’s Supreme Court as recently as November 2022 and Ms. Sturgeon was grasping for want of a workable strategy thereafter.

In pursuit of her pet project to regress to a Middle Ages scale state,
much was neglected in Scotland.

When she inherited the role of First Minister in 2014, educational performance was second to none in all Europe. Today, Scottish educational authorities have long-ago ceased participating in most international standards, and the one they still do clearly shows a regression in STEM performance compared with England.

The Scottish Enlightenment of Robert Burns, David Hume and Adam Smith, all achieved within the United Kingdom, seems a proud historical footnote for a country now in decay.

Signs of the malaise are everywhere under Ms. Sturgeon.

Stagnant company formations in a land known for its astute business people and rampant job losses are another two glaring markers of failure. The prolonged, nationwide covid-lockdowns only reinforced the government-is-the-solution errors.

What we can say about Ms. Sturgeon is that she had a vision for Scotland as an independent nation. Achieving that was always going to be remarkable. It is not surprising she has lost her political energy. In this, at least, one can understand her plight in contrast with recently resigned New Zealand Prime Minister, Jacinda Ardern, who coupled an expressive froth and bubble veneer with authoritarian tendencies.

In the end though, like many who believe in the collective power of government, Ms. Sturgeon’s fitful dream turned into an everyday, dreary reality of decline.

Maybe soon, Scotland can start the journey back to its former glory. The secret to achieving that is for its government to step out of the way!