The Illusion of Choice

Muammar Gaddafi is a madman no doubt, and one hell of a son-of-a-bitch. I’m one of many who welcomed the hail of 124 Tomahawk cruise missiles that signalled the end of his massacre of his own people (by some estimates, this kind of ‘freedom’ retails for only $186 million). Still, when reading Gaddafi’s political manifesto The Green Book the other day, I was struck by at least one semi-sane observation – Western democracy does not deal in freedom in the strictest sense, but merely provides the illusion of choice. His example of a referendum was most interesting: the people vote (providing the smoke and mirrors), while usually only two options are given (providing the stitch-up).

Now, reiterating that Gaddafi is madder than a hundred hatters – and emphasising that much of his Green Book is racist, impractical and at times downright offensive – in this particular instance I think his point is a valid one. Our recent shambles of a State election serves as a nice example. Dissatisfied with the corrupt and inept Labor Party, the people swept them aside and replaced them with Barry O’Farrell’s Liberals. If not for cardboard cut-out Peter Debnam, this would’ve happened 4 years ago. This issue is not that Labor got shafted, but that we have merely traded one bunch of do-nothing bullshit artists for another – and really what choice is that?

Commuting in the lead up to the elections I was frequently accosted by Liberal pamphlet-handlers looking to cover the considerable spread required to claim my seat. One particularly brave soul stopped me to ask the secret to winning my demographic – who he claimed were particularly reluctant to accept his paper propaganda. If I could name one thing that would make me vote Liberal, what would it be? Easy, I say. Make the fucken trains run on time. Make them run when it rains, and not sputter to a halt when it’s too hot. Put some millennium trains on the long trek to Campbelltown – and run some more services so that I don’t feel like I’m being crammed in enroute to Auswitch every day after work… mid rant it hit me then – not only had Labor let me down for nearly two decades, but there wasn’t a single thing the Libs could do to make a lick of difference. The trains are shit and will always be, until I gather the MX-deadened plebs and lead them to revolt.

In the meantime, what am I proposing? Certainly not Gaddafi’s popular committees (for direct democracy) – because try as I might they make almost zero sense. More likely I think we’d be better off disbanding State Government all together. The sole purpose they seem to serve is to antagonise their Federal counterparts (if from the opposite party) or blindly support them (if of the same). Oh, that and get completely drunk with the ‘power’ that only comes with the front bench of our State government – the power to sell of State owned assets, push through crooked land deals and abuse waiters at Iguana Joes. Wiping out state governments all together will see a sharp decline in the amount of pointless current affairs interviews I have to wade through, dramatically cut the percentage I’m lied to about improving my hospitals – and is just the kind of public sector job trimming that I can really get behind.

Raise My Taxes

We live in mediocre financial times. Thanks to the giant dicking handed out to us by bankers and Wall Street types, economies the world over are struggling – with even the might US economy hit hard. Discounting the fact for the time being that the mega-gambling that brought us here continues unabated (and not a single CEO was brought to trial) the GFC is the current go-to excuse to slash budgets and dodge investment projects. Budgetary considerations have provided cover for Republican Governor Scott Walker to dismantle teacher’s unions in Wisconsin, for national Republicans to de-fund Planned Parenthood, and even Obama to cut ‘socialist programs’ that provide food and heating oil to poor people. In short, budget deficits have signalled an all out assault on the all that the Left (I mean actual Left, Barrack) holds dear – and I fear that the Right are just getting warmed up.

The budget slashing bent that is so gripping the US is accentuated by the insistence of both parties to neither cut defence spending (over $700 Billion and ~20% of the total) – nor to raise taxes, even on those earning over $250k a year (the famed ‘Bush Tax Cuts’). The blind alley that this leads to is that ultimately, budgets are balanced on the backs of those can least afford it (the poor, minorities, single parents etc)– and that major public services like hospitals, police, teachers, roads etc suffer. While cuts (or ‘savings’ as the British press is trying to re-brand them as) provide short-term relief from outright bankruptcy (44 of 50 states are looking at deficits) the deteriorating infrastructure becomes more costly to repair, and skilled state workers leave to pursue greener pastures. The time then has come for politicians to stop pretending that there are no other options – and commit to increasing revenue by raising taxes.

Now US Republicans have formed a pseudo-religion in recent times based around continued tax cuts ‘smaller government’ (whatever the hell that is) and trickle down (fuck they have some fancy euphemisms) economics - despite their Messiah Ronald Reagan’s actual history of raising them. As is often the case, Australia has been largely spared the worst of both the GFC and of the necessity to slash public sector budgets – though the aversion to tax increase (of any kind) runs true in most of our politicians, but especially so in our conservatives. The Abbott Liberals (much like their Republican counterparts) are fast becoming the party of No. Their feet dragging and hand wringing on the Flood Levy, in the wake of Cyclone Yasi is indicative of their scare-first, think last mentality. Following such a biblically-sized flood event Gillard’s Labor proposed (and eventually secured) a $2.88/week contribution from someone earning $80K – and nothing from those earning under $50K. Given that Abbott was neither divinely tipped off prior to the flood, nor did he hammer a single nail in pursuit of an Ark – that seemed like a pretty reasonable thing for those of us unaffected to do.

So while my Presidency will herald an age of utopian socialism (where your higher taxes translate to actual health care, education and transport) we should strive in the meantime for the best maintenance of the common good. In contrast to the ‘every man for himself’ narrative crammed down our throats by TV we should be collectively happy to forgo our cup of coffee or can of Mother (I’m looking at you Bogans) if it helps a Queenslander have somewhere to live again. The same goes for the carbon tax – though I’ll get to that.

No god but God

There is no religion that can lay claim to ‘clean hands’ in terms of violence, discrimination, corruption and so on – certainly not with any historical perspective, and not even if you want to restrict the debate to my lifetime. The major religions each harbour extremist elements in the present day: evangelical Christians restricting abortion access and persecuting gays; Israeli Jewish ‘settlers’ inching their way beyond internationally agreed borders and inciting violence, and the advent of the suicide bomber in the name of Islam. In line with a Dawkins-ian view of a religion-free world, each bears the responsibility for harbouring (if not abetting) these elements within their broader following. Despite the shared nature of evil in the name of religion, Islam has been called out for particular recrimination, particularly after September 11 (and the 2002 Bali Bombings for Australians).

In Australia, anti-Islamic sentiment is steadily rising, despite Muslims accounting for just 1.7% of the total population. In a recently released University of Western Sydney survey of racial attitudes NSW was found to be one of the least tolerant states, with nearly 55% of respondents expressing anti-Muslim attitudes. Though this number is maybe a little higher than I would’ve imagined (my faith in my fellow humans is often unrewarded) – it’s no surprise that Islam has become the go-to scapegoat for all manner of issues. The discrimination is endemic and regularly reinforced in forms as diverse as our nightly current affairs enema (eating a Halal sausage will make you a terrorist!), sitting members of Parliament (I’m looking at you, federal Liberal MP Kevin Andrews) and web-based nutbags such as those at the Australian Islamist Monitor (I offer no link, to discourage your traffic…).

Now, in the next few hundred words I appreciate the miniscule odds of changing a single mind already devoted to an anti-Islamic position – but I’m going to try nonetheless. I would begin by saying that I was personally disappointed in my own lack of knowledge of Islam – despite claiming to be a somewhat educated man. My starting position was one hobbled together from hearsay, myth and media. The Prophet, Saudi Arabia, burkas and bomb-vests… and I’m ashamed to say, very little else. This situation has marginally improved thanks to Iranian-American writer and scholar, Reza Aslan (if I get back into the swing of this, he might get a post of his own, but until then, check his site) and his history of Islam: No god but God: The Origins, Evolution, and Future of Islam. To be remotely cognisant in a debate around Islam, I would say it is required reading. To perhaps induce you to get a copy, I learnt the following critical things about Islam:

1. The Diversity of Islam

Tempting as it is to clump the approximately 1.5 billion followers into a single stereotype, they are anything but homogenous. Aside from geographic and ethnic differences (Arab, African, Asian etc), Islam is divided into Sunni, Shia, Sufi (and a range of smaller) denominations. The combination of these factors leads to the striking differences in practices we see between an Iranian Shia and Turkish Sunni (not even accounting for the different Sunni schools of thought). Suffice to say, they do not represent a united front.

2. Socialism and Egalitarianism

The founding principles of Islam extol religious pluralism, gender equality, economic socialism (with an emphasis on helping the poor) and war only for self defence. So the Qur’an says, Muhammad founded his movement in the oasis of Medina where he co-existed peacefully with Jews and Christians, empowered women and collected taxes to be redistributed amongst the tribe. Subsequent veiling and subjugation of women, clashes with Christianity and Judaism and the use of jihad as on offensive weapon are by-products of reinterpretations of Islam over 1500 years by power hungry misogynists. Something Christians should recognise all too well.

3. People of the Book

The Qur’an considers Jews and Christians (amongst others) to all worship the same true God of Abraham, and together with the Torah and Bible to complete Gods divine revelations to man. As such, they were not initially competing ideologies but highly inter-related (and it seems to me, largely based on very similar mythology). The People of the Book were originally allowed to live freely amongst Muslims, trading and working with them – as I alluded to in the case of Muhammad’s Medina. It struck me as rather amazing that such a gulf could have evolved over time – such that we now consider Islam and Christianity to not only be non-compatible, but in active conflict.

So then, I accept that the 9/11 hijackers, Osama bin Laden (and Muammar Gaddafi for that matter) are Muslims – of that there is no question. However, I would also contend that there are many more than a billion Muslims, who are peaceful, non-terrorists and that it is ignorant to judge the whole by a few (it’s preposterous to think that all Catholics are paedophiles… right?). At the very least, take the reasonable position of finding a fact or two about Islam before you leap on the hate bandwagon – keeping well in mind that their religion is at its root not that much different to yours.

A Green Revolution

It’s human nature to ignore bad news - sure the soccer ball growing out of my abdomen is probably cancer, but maybe I’m just putting on a few spherically shaped pounds. In this way, I’ve been loathe to acknowledge that Julia is our new PM, and that she’s a very strong chance of being a regular MP again after Saturday. Since her Caesar-ian knifing of KRudd in the 48 hours after I begged her not to (I was shocked to find she wasn’t a big AFP fan) – her fortunes have gone from bad to worse… and Tony Abbott, like King of the Zombies, keeps on coming back to life.

The campaign has been hard for me to tolerate. Watching Julia and Tony argue about who is tougher on boat people, or who knows the least about broadband is nauseating at best. They seem to be falling over each other as they clamour to the political Right in a last ditch attempt to capture the coveted bogan vote. Overall, they’re presenting distressingly similar platforms – based on all the old favourites: xenophobia, homophobia, lip service on hospitals and school, and blanket climate change denial. Worst of all, both sets of promises have been carefully staged, so that the funding is spread over many years… and much of it won’t take effect to 2012 or later. In short, big headlines and no substance. The only thing running in Labor’s favour is Abbott’s black, black heart. His well known conservative (read evil) stances strike just enough fear into the minds of your moderately informed voter that Julia just may squeak in.

All of which leaves us an unenviable Hobson’s choice. We can elect any PM we like, as long as they are a dark hearted political monster. At a time like this, I rue that the Greens are more novelty organisation than third choice candidate. On actually reading through some of their policies (free university (and cancelling HECS debt), scrapping mandatory migrant detention, a carbon-trading scheme and emphasis on mental health), they actually present a good contrast to the major parties. Generally, they seem to make logical (Leftist) sense. They even claim to be after the tax breaks given to the rich, in true Socialist style. Problem is that the electorate love a winner – and accordingly like to cast their vote on the winning side. The Greens, unlikely to win more than a handful of seats, are thus unlikely to garner much support outside their base – which is a shame.

With that said, nothing good can come of Saturday. A hypothetical Labor win will be sullied by the spectre of Rudd’s political assassination, and Julia’s pitiful vote buying promises. Abandoning the boat people, homosexuals (for shame Penny Wong) and the environment has left a sour taste in many a mouth. Worse, if Abbott actually hoodwinks his way to a win, I have little choice but to migrate – I just couldn’t sit here and watch him smugly ruin my country. Contrary to Latham’s donkey voting suggestion (idiot should never be allowed on air again) I’m voting for the Greens and I hope they win more than their share. I suggest that you do the same.

Don’t Believe a Word

My old mate Kevin Rudd has been taking a hammering lately in the press. Opinion polls show his popularity plummeting (replete with magazine covers depicting him skydiving without a parachute) clearly in favour of my favourite nemesis, Tony Abbott. There is talk of him stepping aside, to allow Julia a clear shot at saving Labor’s ass - and for the life of me, I can’t begin to figure out why. From where I’m sitting, Rudd has chipped away at reform here and there, and while disappointing on key issues (boat people, gay marriage, pussying out on the ETS etc) has made a reasonable fist of his first couple of years. He has the charisma of a discarded chip packet, but he’s intelligent, measured and reliable – all of which suit me just fine. In defence of Dear Leader, let me offer the following:

1. Polling is Bullshit

Snap polling of the kind snaffled up by the mainstream media is flat out crap, no question. Cold calling 1000 respondents, asking them leading questions and then over interpreting their responses is the definition of disingenuous. Extrapolation of this kind of data (+/- 10%) is an affront to logic – but fuck it makes for catchy headlines. Given that actual investigative reporting and thoughtful journalism are both long dead and buried, I understand that pages (of deathly ill) newspapers need filling. Unfortunately, the tail is more often wagging the dog these days – the media outlets take (or commission) the polls, report emphatically on the outcomes and then interview the pollies about their abrupt changes in fortune. Repeat. As news of the bad polling numbers soaks the next news cycle, prospects tend to get even worse… and so on. The only decent stats based political analysis is over at 538, but unfortunately Australia has no such equivalent.

2. The Mining Tax is a good idea

I’m constantly re-surprised that middle class voters can’t seem to get out of their own way. In the US, thousands protested to block health care and tax reform that would directly and substantially benefit them! Australian voters seem to be no different, allegedly opposing Rudd’s mining profits tax – despite the obvious fact that it is aimed at the enormous profits of mining companies. The realities of the tax seem simple. One of the main tenets of mining is that your mine needs to be somewhat close to resource you’re digging up. In contrast to manufacturing, the mining of Aussie uranium or coal cannot be outsourced to China. Given that business is booming, there are plenty of profits to share in – and my educated guess is that Rio and BHP are doing little re-investing in the WA towns that feed their monoliths. More likely, their fat CEO’s are smoking stogies and surveying their newly acquired islands from their shiny Lear Jets. Rudd, sneaky Socialist that he is, is right to go after a fair share of the loot.

3. Tony Abbott Couldn’t Lead a Conga Line

My position on Tony Abbott has been aired here frequently. Aside from his well documented offensive stances to women (young and old), gays, migrants, working Australians and the environment, I don’t even find him a particularly inspiring or even competent leader. Adding insult, he’s also a staunch Monarchist. My feedback from those seemingly predisposed to vote for him seems to be senselessly based on his ability to complete an Iron Man and accordingly how he looks with his shirt off. Fortunately, it’s not all smooth sailing for Abbott, as he tries to quell a revolt of his coalition Nationals and tries to spoil Rudd’s national broadband celebrations. I hope he chokes, and chokes hard.

Overall, the media have created a narrative in the last month or so, to try and add some interest to a contest that should by rights be a non-event. Kudos to them I guess – their power to perpetuate non-reality should keep you all awake at night. My great hope is that your average punter can somehow claw through all the crap and not fulfil this awful prophecy. My advice (eloquently put by comedian Lewis Black) – is that if you’re thinking that one of the candidates would be a really great guy to have round for beers, or to party with – vote for the other guy. Let Bush be a lesson to you all.

Going Down to Cuba

I may be sounding a little more left than usual today – but I’ve never understood how a political system can be feared. The ‘West’ has spent the better part of a century struggling with superpowers like China and Russia, based largely on their embrace of non-Democratic governance. In defence of American-style democracy, we have been taught that Socialism is bad – and Communism is downright evil. Applying elements of morality, of wrong and right to a system of organising society is illogical to say the least. What’s worse is that this poorly thought out premise has been used as a driver to key moments in history – directly during the Cold War and notably by proxy in Afghanistan, Vietnam, Korea and Cuba. While these failed projects are largely confined to dusty history books (certainly unread by the Bush-Cheney marauders), the Caribbean island of Cuba remains under siege.

Modern Cuban history is defined by the intervening hand of the United States. In 1952, the US backed the coup of military strongman Fulgencio. Batista summarily cancelled the scheduled elections (in which he was losing badly) and ruled over a “corrupt and oppressive” regime for the next 7 years. His ‘presidency’ was marked by close ties to the American Mafia (organised crime, gambling, brothels etc), the amassing of a personal fortune, and ongoing support of the US government. It should come as no surprise that he was ultimately overthrown by Cuban dissidents – including t-shirt adorning Che Guevara, and our old mate Fidel Castro. Fidel, as many of you will know, went on to rule Cuba for nigh on 50 years – surviving the botched (US-initiated) Bay of Pigs invasion back in 1961, the brink of nuclear war the year after, and numerous (would you believe 638?) CIA assignation attempts. He implemented a socialist state, based on Marxist-Leninist Communism – cancelling multi-party elections and giving the State control of property and infrastructure.

As a result, Cubans enjoy free life-time health care, education (and an accordingly high literacy rate), as well as heavily subsidised food, housing and utilities. In response, the US imposed a commercial, economic, and financial embargo of Cuba, which (remarkably) remains in place today. The embargo has since become a US law, with the stated goal of encouraging democratisation and improving human rights. Clearly, Communism is not all sunshine and lollipops (or we’d all be doing it) – Cubans queue for food staples and endure frequent shortages. Black market trading is rife, and fruit and vegetables are a newly acquired luxury. As a matter of their Dictatorship, rather than their Communism, they are also not allowed access to computers, are denied free speech, and dissidents are imprisoned, tortured, and occasionally summarily executed.

With that said, I maintain that Communism is nothing to fear in itself. Its spread cannot be contained militarily. Democracy – especially the corrupt, Capitalist style perpetuated by the US is not necessarily to be aspired to (I personally favour benevolent Monarchy, held to account by periodic revolution!). The Cuban Embargo is unjust, collectively punishing an innocent population. It isolates Cubans further, and (just like the Israeli blockade of Palestine) provides a go-to excuse for anti-US sentiment. Obama, disappointingly, has eased restrictions, but failed to lift the ban. As an ongoing symbol of US colonialism and Goliath-David bullying, I wish that he had the fortitude to push further. I’ll leave you with Jackson Browne’s thoughts on the matter – his song sparking my interest in the first place.

No Excuse for Ignorance

Thinking back on it, I was a young man with a very fixed set of poorly thought out ideas. Not many of them would be popular with my current Administration. Hell, my younger self may even have found his arrogant ass on my assassination short list. While it’s a relief in itself to have softened many of my positions (and hardened a few others), it got me thinking about the cause. The boiled down, no bullshit explanation: information. As I got older, not only did I become exposed to a whole range of people with new ideas (hippies, feminists, Jehovah's Witnesses… you name it), but the internet arrived – and with it, unlimited information.

I was lucky enough to be born into the information age - the ‘internets’ went mainstream just as I got to uni, and by the time I left, it was hard to believe I ever lived without it. Nearly a decade later, we are flooded with data – any crackpot with a PC can start his own fake Administration – and it’s becoming harder and harder to separate the good stuff from the crap. With my own evolution in mind, I recommend adding the following bookmarks to your browser, and hopefully some new ideas to your schema:

1. The Daily Beast; I’ll freely admit to getting most of my news from Jon Stewart, maybe with an occasional sprinkling of New York Times (any left-er, and I’d be one of those crazy Obama Socialists… I know). I do try and get some balance by regularly getting some Daily Beast in my life. They generally trend a little left too – but entertain the idea of balance (they let nut-bags like Tucker Carlson write stuff). Madeline Albright is a contributor - but so is Sarah Palin, on occasion. For the record, Christopher Buckley is my personal favourite.

2. Al Jazeera (English); Now this is my true balancing force – and when I finally come to power, I’m going to beam it into all your homes in place of the 6-7pm crap that passes for news on Channel 7 and 9. They gained notoriety for broadcasting Osama’s video messages and are generally accused of perpetuating terrorist propaganda. In reality, they remain one of the most independent media sources in the Middle East. They have an Arab-centric view – which couldn’t be more different to most of ours – I defy you to read it and not learn something.

3. 3 Quarks Daily; I like this page most of all, mostly because the vast majority of it goes straight over my head. Its basic idea is to distil away the crap and post links to interesting pages in “the areas of science, design, literature, current affairs, art, and anything else [they] deem inherently fascinating”. I like to stop by and read an article I would not have otherwise searched for and which otherwise would not make the mainstream press. They’re not all winners – but stumbling on the occasional gem makes it all worthwhile.

That said, there is no longer any reason to perpetuate the set of ideas that you were raised with. The world has become a very small place. Challenge your perceptions, preferably with a first hand source, and see if they still stack up. Think Israel is blameless in their conflict with Palestine? Watch a 90 second clip of Palestinians smuggling cooking oil and medical supplies across the blockade – and see if your position doesn’t soften. I’m not saying my leftist meanderings are the only way (or necessarily correct), I’m just saying you no longer have an excuse not to know better.

Preferred Prime Minister

One of my favourite mortal enemies has returned to the front pages, and so I wake from my posting-slumber. Tony Abbott has returned to the forefront of Australian politics and he has brought my rage with him. While the media collectively swoon over their latest iteration of the straight-talking everyman, I felt the need to offer a reminder of the cold black heart that drives this one.

Back in 2006 when my aspirations for higher office were first made public, I eagerly seized on the first major benefit of my hypothetic presidency: three free assassinations. At that time, I had no hesitation in penning my first nomination, The Honourable Tony Abbott MP. Without recapping too heavily, he stands directly opposed to apparently all of my Administrations positions – as a devout conservative (Catholic) he spouts the expected drivel. Over a year later, with Abbott’s foot lodged firmly down his own throat, my offer was repeated. At the time, my only solace was that he was one of many strands forming the noose that was slowly tightening around Howard’s neck.

Unfortunately, in the aftermath of Kevin’07 and Howard’s demise, Abbott survived. He sensibly dodged the poison chalice that is the re-bound leadership - waiting until Turnbull had steered the Libs to relatively higher ground – before pouncing. On December 1 last year, he slithered his way to the party’s highest post by the underwhelming margin of 42-41 votes. Staggeringly, his springboard to victory was an increasingly popular one among his cronies on the Right: Global Warming Denial. His opposition to the governments (flawed, yet promising) Emissions Trading Scheme was just the populist stance he required – ignoring that fact that his own position was later described by Turnbull as “bullshit”. Eloquently put.

Since that time, Abbott has been particularly offensive to Australian women, counselling them on the value of their virginity (thoughtful), their ironing technique (charming) and describing Deputy PM Julia Gillard’s grin as “shit-eating” (classy). Worst of all, Abbott has promoted the bumbling Barnaby Joyce to the finance portfolio – a move that has left me speechless with disbelief. We all get collectively dumber every time Barnaby speaks and it destroys my faith in democratic governance that a man of his calibre can rise to such a post. Despite the clumsy start, compounding his own thinly veiled ultra-conservatism, Abbott is experiencing an extended honeymoon and currently winning in some preferred PM polls.

For me, it comes back to the type of leader we want for our country – the ‘good bloke’ the media seem to crave, or a serious, intelligent human. Currently, we have a thoughtful (ok nerdy) policy wonk, who speaks Mandarin and makes measured, logical statements. I guess in many ways that makes him ‘out of touch with the common man’ and not first on my invite list for a night on the beers – but isn’t that exactly what we want our PM to be?