Follow TV Tropes

Following

General Australian Politics Thread

Go To

Frogger5 from The Whole Sort of General Mish Mash Since: Nov, 2011 Relationship Status: Drift compatible
#751: Feb 11th 2014 at 11:35:46 PM

Shaun Micallef's Mad As Hell starts its third season tonight at 8.00. Give 'em hell, Shaun. wink

edited 11th Feb '14 11:35:57 PM by Frogger5

Wanna see the random crap I get up to? Me neither. http://jesseskwilliams.tumblr.com/
medicus Sierra 117 from Australia Since: Sep, 2009
Sierra 117
#752: Feb 12th 2014 at 12:03:45 AM

Rudd later jumped on the bandwagon, obviously Abbott capitalised on the fact that this was what he'd been saying all along. But Gillard was the one who went full-throttle in positioning Labor as tough on refugees, and she essentially established bipartisanship with the Coalition on the issue.
What? Since 2001 asylum seekers has been a partisan issue, a race to the bottom on who can treat boat people worse.

And it's one the Coalition will always win.

Gillard then enthusiastically put in a lot of effort in repositioning asylum seekers as a vital issue, and defending anxiety about boatpeople.

For people to say they're anxious about border security doesn't make them intolerant. It certainly doesn't make them a racist...

That's just dog whistle politics. Sounds reasonable, and it appeases the people that are racist and intolerant.

"Sustainable Australia" sounds reasonable to anyone that understands the fragile Australian environment, but it also says "I will keep out brown people."

Leading to Fiona Nash in the 2013 election arguing that boat people were an issue to Western Sydney because "congestion is already bad." I hate this country.

It's not over. Not yet.
editerguy from Australia Since: Jan, 2013 Relationship Status: You cannot grasp the true form
#753: Feb 12th 2014 at 12:42:44 AM

Since 2001 asylum seekers has been a partisan issue, a race to the bottom on who can treat boat people worse.

Dismantling the Pacific Solution in 2007 was obviously not part of a 'race to the bottom', it was dismantling Howard's signature 'Border Protection' policy. That was a positive step. It could have been a starting point for more general reduction of punitive nonsense.

But Gillard came in and went straight back to Howard-style rhetoric and policies.

it appeases the people that are racist and intolerant.

Yes.

edited 12th Feb '14 12:57:45 AM by editerguy

joeyjojo Happy New Year! from South Sydney: go the bunnies! Since: Jan, 2001
Happy New Year!
#754: Feb 12th 2014 at 6:05:49 AM

Man I should really watch the show, shame I'm normally out wensday evening.

"Sustainable Australia" sounds reasonable to anyone that understands the fragile Australian environment, but it also says "I will keep out brown people."

Care to give any examples of sustainability being used in like that?

So that pamphlet was a genuinely endorse by the Australian government? That's the message they want to send? Fuck that just that's depressing

edited 12th Feb '14 6:24:55 AM by joeyjojo

hashtagsarestupid
PippingFool Eclipse the Moon from A Floridian Prison Since: Oct, 2009 Relationship Status: I get a feeling so complicated...
Eclipse the Moon
#755: Feb 12th 2014 at 6:14:51 AM

I'm so fucking angry right now I just... Gah.

-Bashes head against the wall so hard the bricks fall out-

I'm having to learn to pay the price
Euodiachloris Since: Oct, 2010
#756: Feb 12th 2014 at 6:51:58 AM

...You know, that reminded me a lot of "educational" pamphlets the South African government produced during Apartheid. -_-

Congrats: I didn't know I remembered the "don't waste the police's time" one. Or the "scare them into not moving beyond the Bantustans without papers" one. Until now. <_< (To be fair, there were also classics like the "scare people into taking TB treatment and shots seriously, and not going just for muti or the head in the sand approach" one, too. But, hey.) Well done, Rudd and Abbot. The National Party of 1982 would just love you guys.

I wonder... what does the Australian arm of the South African diaspora make of all this? It'll be... rather familiar.

edited 12th Feb '14 7:00:02 AM by Euodiachloris

medicus Sierra 117 from Australia Since: Sep, 2009
Sierra 117
#757: Feb 12th 2014 at 4:44:19 PM

Care to give any examples of sustainability being used in like that?
"Not a Big Australia, but a Sustainable Australia." Limiting population growth instead of expanding it. Options are limited essentially to getting rid of the Baby Bonus and lowering immigration. Just about everyone thinks the Baby Bonus was a stupid idea. Lowering immigration, of course, appeals to that Western Sydney demographic that wants to keep out brown people.

You can search for some of the speeches on youtube, but I won't inflict Gillard on you.

It's not over. Not yet.
joeyjojo Happy New Year! from South Sydney: go the bunnies! Since: Jan, 2001
Happy New Year!
#758: Feb 12th 2014 at 5:07:03 PM

Saying 'sustainability' is code talk for 'the hell to brown people' is a load of Hyperbole however. What about economics and environmental sustainability?

edited 12th Feb '14 5:10:32 PM by joeyjojo

hashtagsarestupid
medicus Sierra 117 from Australia Since: Sep, 2009
Sierra 117
#759: Feb 12th 2014 at 5:58:56 PM

What about a news article?

"Today she said it's not an immigration debate. Where does she think all these people have been coming from in western Sydney? We grow them in our back garden? I mean, for every four people who move to Sydney from other parts of Australia, seven move to Sydney from overseas.
"And I'll tell you what it is, it's a fraud. It's an attempt to con people in western Sydney that she's going to do something about congestion. And I think some smartie in the Labor Party worked out that sending out signals on population would be a proxy for the asylum-seeker and climate change debates. It's clever politics. But it's a fraud . . . of the worst order."

It's not over. Not yet.
medicus Sierra 117 from Australia Since: Sep, 2009
Sierra 117
#760: Feb 12th 2014 at 6:18:28 PM

Or maybe a book?

On asylum-seeker issues, Gillard (ABC 2010a) aimed to steer a middle path between right and left, claiming that one should demonise neither as ‘rednecks’ people who were understandably anxious about boats arriving nor as ‘bleeding hearts’ those concerned about children behind razor wire, but feel empathy for both. Consequently, Gillard (Oakes 2010) displayed little empathy for adult asylum-seekers, although showing motherly concern for their ‘innocent’ children. She did use figures on the low numbers of asylum-seekers to try to undermine Abbott’s scare campaign (O’Brien 2010a). Nonetheless, her comments about a ‘sustainable’ rather than a ‘big’ Australia (Franklin 2010a) were commonly seen as a dog whistle on immigration issues as well as an attempt to address legitimate concerns about outer-urban infrastructure and transport issues. On both asylum and immigration issues, Gillard was trying to address the tensions that she had previously argued Howard and Abbott had exploited between Labor’s ‘blue collar’ and ‘tertiary educated’ constituencies (Gillard 2003, 104). This framing of Labor’s electoral problems risks reinforcing socially conservative constructions both of working-class attitudes and of working-class identity. It downplays the ethnic and social diversity within the Australian working class itself as well as potential links between the working class and other disadvantaged groups. It also reveals the ongoing influence on the Labor Party of Howard’s neo-liberal constructions of so-called ‘elite’, politically correct issues and ‘mainstream’ issues (Johnson 2007, 39–50).

In an interview with the Nine Network’s Laurie Oakes just days after becoming Prime Minister, Julia Gillard, however, rejected her predecessor’s vision, saying, ‘I don’t believe in a big Australia. Kevin Rudd indicated that he had a view about a big Australia. I’m indicating a different approach. I think we want an Australia that is sustainable’ (Symons-Brown 2010). Under Gillard, ‘sustainability’ became the catchphrase of the campaign. In her ministerial reshuffle after assuming the prime ministership, she added ‘Sustainable’ to the title of the Minister for Population, Tony Burke, rendering him the Minister for Sustainable Population.

Gillard directed her words to voters in outer-metropolitan areas who were concerned about the impact of increased numbers of residents on service delivery and infrastructure capability, thus framing the debate in terms of maintaining Australians’ unique lifestyle (Gordon 2010). But she also appealed to green voters with her emphasis on sustainability. Gillard’s departure from the ‘growth is good’ mantra marked an end to the historical bipartisan consensus that held that Australians needed to populate or we would perish.

The parties were responding to a shift in public opinion on the issue. Under the Howard Government, Australia had substantially increased its immigration intake, and the electorate had generally supported this program. But under the Rudd Government, the perception emerged, and was fostered by the Opposition, that the government had lost control of Australia’s borders. Of course, this was a nonsense not supported by the facts, but the issue became more acute with cost-of-living pressures and shock jocks bemoaning infrastructure bottlenecks. A survey of Australians’ attitudes to social issues, released during the campaign, found that three-quarters of Australians opposed the idea of a bigger Australia, with the figure reaching 86 per cent in regional Queensland. Blue-collar workers were most opposed to population growth (81 per cent), while social professionals were the least resistant (57 per cent) (Curtin 2010).

From Julia 2010: the caretaker election, available on Google Books.

It's not over. Not yet.
editerguy from Australia Since: Jan, 2013 Relationship Status: You cannot grasp the true form
#761: Feb 12th 2014 at 6:55:08 PM

Saying 'sustainability' is code talk for 'the hell to brown people' is a load of Hyperbole however.

Well if you make it that simplistic, sure. But when people talk about population growth and a "Sustainable Australia" specifically, their focus always seems to be drastically reducing migration (foreigners, now largely non-white) as opposed to the Baby Bonus and other incentives for white-majority Australia to have more babies. So to me, it just seems like a PC way to express xenophobia and fears about increasing racial and cultural diversity.

edit

In other news, Australia's unemployment rate has jumped to 6 per cent for the first time in more than a decade.

edited 12th Feb '14 8:20:31 PM by editerguy

medicus Sierra 117 from Australia Since: Sep, 2009
PippingFool Eclipse the Moon from A Floridian Prison Since: Oct, 2009 Relationship Status: I get a feeling so complicated...
Eclipse the Moon
#763: Feb 18th 2014 at 10:11:50 PM

-Sees the fucking comic book again-

I want to go back in time to a world where that doesn't exist.

I'm having to learn to pay the price
medicus Sierra 117 from Australia Since: Sep, 2009
Sierra 117
#764: Feb 21st 2014 at 2:14:05 PM

Hockey is talking about increasing the pension age to 70. That's good, it's unsustainable, we're expected to pay for our retirement...

...and then he says it would only apply to people aged 30 and under.

sjgkksjgskgdsjghsjfeigharaaaaaaahhhhh!!!!!!!!!!

Gotta coddle those baby boomers as long as possible, right? Gotta keep those votes coming in!

This is the worst government in Australian history. The. Worst. I thought Stanley Bruce's government was the winner, trying to cut the minimum wage and led Aus into the Great Depression, but I'm sure that's a record Abbott and his mates can beat. We already have gulags in the Pacific, I wonder how much further we can sink.

edited 21st Feb '14 2:20:11 PM by medicus

It's not over. Not yet.
editerguy from Australia Since: Jan, 2013 Relationship Status: You cannot grasp the true form
#765: Feb 24th 2014 at 12:56:24 AM

Asylum seeker dies in some sort of outbreak of violence in Australia's Manus Island Detention Centre, prompting calls for Morrison to resign.

Abbott defends his minister in characteristic fashion.

"You don't want a wimp running border protection, you want someone who is strong, who is decent and Scott Morrison is both strong and decent."

"As long as he's tough, who cares what happens?" is his point, I'd guess.

Completing Australia's current militaristic approach to the issue, it's recently been determined the Manus Island detention centre is run by a Sri Lankan former military officer.

PippingFool Eclipse the Moon from A Floridian Prison Since: Oct, 2009 Relationship Status: I get a feeling so complicated...
medicus Sierra 117 from Australia Since: Sep, 2009
Sierra 117
#767: Feb 24th 2014 at 2:24:17 PM

Yeah, you don't want a wimp running "border protection". We'll stick with the thug we currently have, thanks.

Sad thing is that most people still want tougher action against boat people (no mention of refugees that come via plane, or, say, the thousands that overstay visas). There's really nothing further we can do save for withdrawing from the Refugee Act, starting a war with Indonesia or just flat out shooting asylum seekers and sinking their boats.

Suicide internationally, but this is the Abbott government, he'd pimp out his own daughters if he could score some points against Labor by doing so. They have already decided to defy a hundred years of tradition and release Cabinet papers relating to the home insulation scheme. And there are fears that they might wreck the UN's probe into human rights abuses in Sri Lanka in order to cooperate on asylum seekers.

[up]Your avatar is incredibly appropriate for that post.

edited 24th Feb '14 2:29:49 PM by medicus

It's not over. Not yet.
medicus Sierra 117 from Australia Since: Sep, 2009
Sierra 117
#768: Feb 24th 2014 at 5:15:27 PM

In the last federal election, I collected all the political campaign material that made it to my mailbox, with the intent of eventually donating it to my university library.

Sounds strange, but as a history student I'm well aware of just how useful sources like that can be.

Anyway, I've finally gotten around to donating it. Going back and looking through the leaflets, I'm not surprised that the Liberals won. They must have had Satan himself writing it. "End the waste, end the debt, end the tax, stop the boats." Labor never had a chance.

It's not all dreary of course. Clive Palmer sent me a DVD! "Vote for Palmer United, we're fair dinkum (Titanic II video inside)".

Wonder if I should keep Tony's "Contract With Australia":

1. A stronger, diversified economy

2. Carbon tax gone

3. End the waste and debt

4. Build modern roads and improve services

5. Stop the boats with proven policies

6. Two million new jobs within a decade

How well do you think he's delivered on those? Perhaps I should do as he urges and "keep this contract to hold us to account."

edited 24th Feb '14 5:15:46 PM by medicus

It's not over. Not yet.
Yuanchosaan antic disposition from Australia Since: Jan, 2010
antic disposition
#769: Feb 25th 2014 at 2:53:31 PM

My favourite WTH? campaign ad is still this one.

"Doctor Who means never having to say you're kidding." - Bocaj
joeyjojo Happy New Year! from South Sydney: go the bunnies! Since: Jan, 2001
Happy New Year!
#770: Feb 25th 2014 at 4:20:15 PM

I never bothered watching the Titanic ll DVD was it any good?

hashtagsarestupid
medicus Sierra 117 from Australia Since: Sep, 2009
Sierra 117
#771: Feb 25th 2014 at 7:00:49 PM

My favourite WTH? campaign ad is still this one◊.
Isn't that the photo from when the carbon tax was passed?

Still can't believe Abbott/Murdoch was able to sell that as the greatest betrayal ever committed by a government. And it still works — no matter what Greens/Labor says about Coalition policy, all they have to do is scream "CARBON TAX!" and the audience applauds.

It's not over. Not yet.
MrMallard Since: Oct, 2010
#772: Feb 26th 2014 at 4:07:12 AM

1. A stronger, diversified economy

2. Carbon tax gone

3. End the waste and debt

4. Build modern roads and improve services

5. Stop the boats with proven policies

6. Two million new jobs within a decade

1: So far, this has been... not too bad. It's pretty much the same, I've noticed - maybe I'm wrong, though.

2: Why get rid of the Carbon Tax? It's $15 per ton, do you know how much CO 2 you'd have to release to make up one ton of carbon dioxide? Stupid, crowd-pleasing rhetoric.

3: Waste is the same as always, to my understanding. As for debt... well, considering Tony Abbott used Government funds to attend the wedding of one of Gina Rhinehart's kids, I'd say this claim is just not sound.

4: Modern roads... How about instead of ripping up old roads and making new ones, we repair the dangerously neglected streets so that they feel like new? It does the same thing for much less money. Of course, some streets -should- be replaced wholly, but not enough to justify a complete overhaul. And even then, the country towns will be neglected - "modern roads" is for modern cities after all. Also, as to services, how is the government going to whip private businesses into shape?

5: STOP THE PLANES, DICKHEAD. CHASE THE OVER-STAYERS, FUCKWIT.

6: This one is laughable - Holden is taking its business off-shore, and Qantas - the Flying Kangaroo, not Australian owned for a while now but still a national icon - is laying off 5000 jobs.

In short: History books will refer to these flyers and strategies as propaganda and maybe even hate speech ("Stop the Boats" will be seen as the horrible xenophobia that it is, I can only hope).

edited 26th Feb '14 4:07:54 AM by MrMallard

tricksterson Never Trust from Behind you with an icepick Since: Apr, 2009 Relationship Status: Above such petty unnecessities
Never Trust
#773: Feb 26th 2014 at 6:12:20 AM

1, 3 and 6 are vague generalized promises of the sort all politicians of any stripe make with a big empty spot on just exactly 'how they're going to do this.

Trump delenda est
IraTheSquire Since: Apr, 2010
#774: Feb 26th 2014 at 12:27:33 PM

I really dislike politicians talking about increasing jobs, since you can have openings but without people actually working because they get laid off too easily, or they have no access to training for the skills needed for those jobs.

Rather I'd like to see decreasing unemployment rates.

medicus Sierra 117 from Australia Since: Sep, 2009
Sierra 117
#775: Feb 26th 2014 at 3:32:40 PM

1: So far, this has been... not too bad. It's pretty much the same, I've noticed - maybe I'm wrong, though.
Manufacturing is dead in this country. Holden and Toyota left under their watch, the follow-on will destroy the manufacturing base.

Of course Tony & friends don't see that as a negative — it might damage the unions and by extension Labor, so all good.

2: Why get rid of the Carbon Tax? It's $15 per ton, do you know how much CO 2 you'd have to release to make up one ton of carbon dioxide? Stupid, crowd-pleasing rhetoric.
Because electricity prices! Cost-of-living pressures! Broken election promise! GREENS!

The Coalition appeals directly to that segment of the population that believes they don't have to do anything while still doing something about climate change. That the God of the Free Market will come in and save them at the last second.

3: Waste is the same as always, to my understanding. As for debt... well, considering Tony Abbott used Government funds to attend the wedding of one of Gina Rhinehart's kids, I'd say this claim is just not sound.
Also George Brandis spent $13,000 on a new bookcase for his office to store $7,000 worth of books.

Then it turned out the bookcase was too big for the office. So he had a second, smaller one built. At a higher cost.

4: Modern roads... How about instead of ripping up old roads and making new ones, we repair the dangerously neglected streets so that they feel like new? It does the same thing for much less money. Of course, some streets -should- be replaced wholly, but not enough to justify a complete overhaul. And even then, the country towns will be neglected - "modern roads" is for modern cities after all. Also, as to services, how is the government going to whip private businesses into shape?
How about instead of building more roads they build more railways and invest in public transport? Nah, too socialist.

They will improve services by privatising them and having the free market make them more efficient. Never in the history of the world has this resulted in poorer-quality services and higher prices. Nope. Absolutely never.

6: This one is laughable - Holden is taking its business off-shore, and Qantas - the Flying Kangaroo, not Australian owned for a while now but still a national icon - is laying off 5000 jobs.
You can still create jobs while losing them. He only said he'd create two million new jobs — not additional jobs.

If this government gets a second term then Australia as we know it is dead.

edited 26th Feb '14 3:33:02 PM by medicus

It's not over. Not yet.

Total posts: 2,288
Top