Crikey

Crikey, the internet news/review site. Generally aims to be even handed although has a mix of regular authors with an angle.

During the thorough routing of the Liberal government on the weekend there was talk about the debt owed to Howard and the respect he deserved for his '2nd longest serving PM' stint.

I can agree on one point only. Private agendas and corruptions aside, working in the public service is an honorable pursuit. Regardless of ideology, the desire to work in the interests of the public is a noble one. That is the only piece of credit to which John Howard is entitled. A short article from M. MacCallum from Crikey sums up the recent events to perfection:

The Dubious Legacy of John Winston Howard

John Winston Howard was Australia’s second longest-serving Prime Minister, presiding almost unchallenged over the political landscape for well over a decade. His time in government can not be dismissed lightly. However it can be dismissed heavily, so here goes.

Even on his political deathbed, Howard insisted that his government had delivered great economic reform. In fact in almost 12 years he implemented just three important changes, all of highly dubious merit. The first was to move the responsibility for monetary policy from the elected government to the government-appointed Reserve Bank. This meant that he no longer had to take the blame for rises in interest rates, while of course continuing to demand the credit for falls. This early switch developed into a pattern: throughout his prime ministership, Howard steadfastly refused to accept responsibility for anything. Only on Saturday night, with nothing left to lose, was he prepared to own up.

Howard’s second legacy was the never-ever GST, a particularly nasty piece of regressive taxation whose only virtue is its universality; if a GST is absolutely comprehensive it is impossible to avoid. By compromising with Democrats to exempt some so-called essential items, Howard destroyed even this advantage. The GST remains an unfair and lazy way of collecting revenue, and has led to an immensely complicated series of benefits and hand outs to compensate for its ill effects. It is now entrenched as monument to Howard’s political dishonesty and economic incompetence.

The third innovation was, of course, WorkChoices. Unheralded and badly thought out, this grab-bag of ideological thuggery was thrust upon a startled electorate when an unexpected opportunity arose, and the results are now clear. Some of its worst features have already been quietly disposed of, and most of the rest will go as soon as the senate allows. What is left will indeed constitute reform of the industrial relations system; but it will not be the “reform” of which Howard boasted.

Howard’s other claim is that he leaves Australia a stronger, prouder and more prosperous country than he found it.

Stronger? Well, that it depends how you measure it. Howard huggers have always claimed that in international affairs, Australia now punches above its weight. What they actually mean is that Howard was duchessed by George W Bush, who found him a very amenable acolyte. The rest of the world saw us in that light. Stronger should mean more independent, and self-confident. The only bit of Australia in which those qualities are more obvious is the Australian cricket team.
Prouder, then? Certainly more arrogant, less tolerant – the pride that is counted among the seven deadly sins. But prouder of real and lasting achievement? What achievement?
And more prosperous – some people certainly are, much; and the country’s overall wealth has grown, although Howard has had very little to do with that. But we are also far, far deeper in debt, and less secure as a result. By an economist’s measure, our material wealth has grown; but if prosperity is seen as a wider indicator of quality of life, as genuine happiness, Howard failed us badly.

And if we are wealthier, at what cost? We are certainly not the people we were in 1996 when the government last changed.

For more than eleven years, John Howard led us on a voyage driven by greed and fear, into parochialism and paranoia, selfishness and racism, bigotry and corruption, and other dark places in the Australian psyche where we never should have gone. It was a mean and ugly trip, and it will take us all a long time to recover.

As he left the Wentworth hotel on Saturday night surrounded by his weeping and cheering entourage of orcs my main feeling was not of exultation or even euphoria, but of relief—the same sort of reaction I had to Cathy Freeman’s win at the Sydney Olympics, or at the moment, 17 years ago, when I stubbed out my last cigarette. The result was long-anticipated and entirely welcome, but how dreadful I, and many others, would have felt if it had not happened.
And on that note spare a thought for Labor’s patriarch, Gough Whitlam, who against most expectations has survived to see another Labor government in Canberra. The final word should be his: a great quotation which he used in another context altogether, but which is utterly appropriate for November 24, 2007: E quindi uscimmo a reverder le stelle.

It is the last line of Dante’s Inferno, describing the poet’s return from hell, and it means: And thence we emerged, to see the stars again.

But if Howard was wrong about most things, he at least got Peter Costello right.
For eleven years the man sat there drooling, lusting after the leadership of his party, talking up a storm to his credulous colleagues, plotting with sycophants, sending out his dwarfish messenger Glenn Milne to relate improbable stories of his talent and support. He never actually had the guts to do anything about it, but by golly he let it be known that when the opportunity came, he would show us all.

And when his party was not only ready to offer him the prize, was indeed in real need of his services, Costello spat the dummy right out of the ground. Prime Minister, with all the trappings of office and all the resources of government, would be just fine; but leader of the opposition, the challenge Kevin Rudd took on at precisely Costello’s age before sweeping to victory in less than a year, looked just a little too much like hard work. Poor Petey-pie, too old at fifty, too lazy at any time.

When his colleagues are considering a farewell gift for him, they should pass over the gold watch and all chip in for an iron lung. This would at least remove any lingering doubt over whether Peter Costello would work in one.

YouTube

YouTube has given me an incentive to start piecing together all the assorted multimedia on my computer. On the side panel is a new set of links to videos that I'll put up on you tube. And just as a test for the embedding option here is a little video.

That Bolivian Miner

I lie here trying to sleep at night and as it so often does, my mind turns to the miners of Potosi in Bolivia. Since Heather is away for the night and I've finished uni for the year, there is no reason why I can't get out of bed again to release the thoughts.

Before I go on, I want to ask any conservative readers (or self-named realists/pragmatists) to try, for the moment, to divorce their minds from their passion for free-market economies and distaste for anti-US sentiments.

Ask yourself, is it fair, in this day and age, with the wealth that the world holds, for a man to spend his entire life toiling deep underground. For days, sometimes weeks on end he will try, often in vain, to chip away at a possible mineral vein that might earn his family a little extra income. His wife brings him food and water while he works, he sleeps when he can work no longer, in the same crevice in which he has been chiseling away at for weeks and will continue to do so for weeks. It is a life that the any animal in western society would be saved from. Perhaps I'm not portraying the image clearly enough in all it's horror to properly conjure up this sad, sickening and disturbing reality for the miners of Potosi.

The mine is foreign owned and the workers are paid a pittance for the minerals they extract from this antiquated mountain of death and misery. Some might argue that you can't blame the company, others might not. Some think the nationalisation of Bolivian industries like this one is a backward step and a crack at the US administration, others consider it a necessary step to improve the quality of life of some of the hardest workers on the planet. Isn't that fair? Isn't it just that hard work be rewarded?

I feel ill when I realise how many people will try and justify why they think this scenario is fair, or perhaps just retort - life isn't fair. Then another wave of sadness hits when I realise that no appealing to these people's emotions will make a difference, they don't care if they are called heartless. Water off a duck's back. Another dead child, 'hmm a sad reality', another dead miner 'hmm life isn't fair'. If I argue with these people and try to understand and communicate with their self centred universes I get nowhere. If my anger boils over I get called a communist. Note that 'self-centred' implies the fact that they place decreasing importance on people and things the further they are (geographically or cognitively) from themselves (my theory of the concentric circles of compassion). Did these people never think about the principles expounded in the children's stories they read growing up? or the bible if they are christians, or the Qu'ran etc etc. Isn't being self-centred a bad thing? An uncharitable, selfish character trait? Why is it so acceptable? I hear people say about voting 'I vote on how the policies will affect me' Answer: What is 'selfishness'?

I take some heart from the expanding EU and the possible development of similar international co-operation in other regions. Some conspiracy theorists think the Rockefeller foundation is behind a push for a global government. I doubt this, but a convergence towards a system of international co-operation that makes decisions based on the human interest, rather than the national interest is something that I wish for.

That's about all I have to say about that for now. Maybe a quick macroeconomic discussion.

Government driven rises in wage rates (due to those damn unions!) is often blamed for driving up inflation. But what about market driven wages rates - ie. the massive salaries paid to undeserving executives (let's not pretend they deserve it - it's who you know, not what you know). The inflationary pressure caused by this mechanism is sure to rival, if not exceed the pressure from meagre wage rises for teachers and nurses.

"Money for all"

Seems to be the subtext to the policies of the major parties during this election period. And thank goodness our level headed Liberal party policy makers have had the decency to ensure that not only will the wealthiest echelon of society receive some free money for their kiddies education in their tax rebate, but those people who do not earn enough to pay tax will, quite rightly, get nothing. Because, in this land of opportunity, it is all about choice. If you choose to work hard then you too can own a house one day. If you don't earn enough to negatively gear your investment property then that is your own fault by being a selfish lazy bugger.

In case you can't tell, I'm being sarcastic (Homer).

So while Tony Abbot continues his drive to include self-flagellation in the core curriculum for Year 7 students, John Howard continues to insult the intelligence of the Australian public - or perhaps he has gauged it correctly? On the one hand he claims the credit for the growth of the Australian economy, while on the other he refuses to take responsibility for the rise in interest rates. It doesn't take a high school certificate to realise that first, John Howard and every policy that he can conceive is not responsible for the growth in the economy or the rise in interest rates. The economy is far more complicated than that. Second, a growing economy = inflationary pressure = rise in interest rates. Perhaps that is the fact that eludes our master manager of the economy? The most fundamental macroeconomic principle that virtually the entire public service could have personally briefed him on, or perhaps all cried out in unison, whatever Herr Howard prefers. If the team of Abbot and Costello return to power we can say goodbye to the fading remnants of a decent society that values the outcomes of other peoples lives instead of the money driven rationalist fanaticism - dare I say - extremism of the most elitist self-righteous antipathetic animus cohort of politicians that one would care to imagine.

On the flip side, Kevin Rudd has been disappointing of late. A bit quiet and boring really. But can't blame him, all he needs to do to win the election is smile at the camera and not start using the word 'adumbrate' like our incumbent cucumber.

Only three days left of political advertising, praised be Allah.

I've started packing boxes in preparation for the Tanzanian tater. Uni results come out in a week. Roughly when I start my summer semester. The sun is hot and the skies are clear. Time for a gym session I do believe.