New Australian Anthems
New Australian Anthems
Vote for your favourite
Sensitive New-Age Cowpersons?
Sir Roger on his way home tonight happened to catch a little Pink Floyd on his mobile-wireless-machine-that-plugs-directly-into-the-ears, what used to be called a “tranny” before that term, too, was hijacked by some people.
And although it is no secret that Sir Roger is the world’s biggest fan of Pink Floyd (who – in the form at least of Roger Waters – are touring America and Europe over the next year or so) he had never really heard the words of the song he was listening to.
He was, frankly, shaken because of the final verse and how closely he identified with it.
So shit shit shit! Sir Roger was (and somewhat remains) in existential/ontological crisis.
But there’s more.
Are we all comfortably numb? Are we all saying, “Julia, Tony … whatever, as long as you don’t rock my boat and disturb my comfortable numbness? I know there are big and great challenges for the world but I can’t bear to think about them.
Give me the simple ones with simple slogans. Clunkers. Immigration. Laura Norda.
And I know there were dreams and visions of great and exciting possible futures once, but now just let me rest in my comfortable numbness”? Are we thinking that?
As George Steiner wrote,
“ The immense majority of human biographies are a gray transit between domestic spasm and oblivion.”
So there is the song for you to listen to and here are the lyrics of the final verse that put Sir Roger in a spin:
“ When I was a child
I caught a fleeting glimpse
Out of the corner of my eye
I turned to look but it was gone
I cannot put my finger on it now
The child is grown
The dream is gone
I… Have become comfortably numb
Sir Roger seemed agitated. Sucking the grease of a plump peasant pheasant thigh from his fingers, he suddenly ejaculated, “Did he bury the bloody thing before he cremated it‽ Or did he cremate it before burying it‽ Can you cremate something when it’s already buried‽ What is the point of burying it if it’s already cremated‽ One doesn’t…one can’t believe him! One suspects that he has hidden the thing away and that its grisly zombie body will rise from the grave as soon as the election is over if he wins … if he wins … god save us if he wins … ”
The sweet young serving girl comforted Sir Roger with hot English truffled muffins, strawberries and cream, and other sustenance … and looked after him in the conservatory for a time until he was exhausted.
Sir Roger has asked one to share with his readers this excerpt from a Tony Abbott doorstop on 28 April:
“ QUESTION:
Speaking of endorsements by Queenslanders, Pauline Hanson has given you her endorsement to be PM. What do you think of that?
TONY ABBOTT:
Look, I’m happy to get as wide a range of endorsements as possible.
QUESTION:
But specifically from Pauline?
TONY ABBOTT:
I’m happy to get as wide a range of endorsements as possible.
As wide a range as possible? Ahmedinajad perhaps? Would an endorsement from Mugabe be welcomed? Kim Jong-il? Not too wide? Or Than Shwe? Still within the acceptable range?
Abbott is so demonstrably a man of such immense integrity.
Sir Roger had earlier in the morning been astonished by the view expressed by a woman from a certain Brisbane electorate that ‘a dreadful and massive invasion’ was taking place in north western Australia.
“They’re taking over the country!” she exclaimed.
Yes, apparently it is true, if you believe what the Monk and the Ranga are telling their “fellow Australians”.
Those pitifully few, desperate, seasick, starving, terrified, asylum seekers, with their hands out pleading for assistance, in their leaking boats, fleeing the murderous horrors against which our soldiers fight, magically become, as they enter Australian waters, mighty invading armies of terrorists intent on destroying (white) Australia’s way of life and all we have ever stood for… if, as Sir Roger repeats, you believe what both the emotionally unstable Catholic and the robotic Atheist claim.
“Whom must one vote for?” whimpered Sir Roger as he threw down another medicinal Rémy Martin.
“The Whores? Or the Other Whores?”
Sir Roger is not an economist. He is (therefore) not a marxist. Nevertheless he has long been confused and at the same time fascinated by the doctrine of endless economic growth and has wondered from where and how, in our system, the profit can endlessly come. Who, ultimately, pays?
Here are two items that help to understand these questions.
The first is an animated version of an RSA talk in April this year, “The Crises of Capitalism: Is it time to look beyond Capitalism towards a new social order that would allow us to live within a system that would be responsible, just and humane?” by Professor David Harvey¹.
The second is a 2010 Deakin Lecture broadcast on the ABC’s Big Ideas program on Sunday. “Prosperity Without Growth?” by Professor Tim Jackson²
You can listen to the whole talk here, or on the ABC’s Big Ideas page, or download the podcast from their page.
ABC’s notes:
“So much of the analysis of how we respond to climate change assumes that economic growth and emissions reduction are compatible goals. But is this wishful thinking? To question maximising economic growth as an organising principle of society seems close to economic heresy. But is there any evidence that we can de-link consumption and economic growth from emissions growth? Must we re-think the very notion of growth and what it means to be genuinely prosperous?”
¹ “Distinguished Professor of Anthropology at the Graduate Center of the City University of New York (CUNY). A leading social theorist of international standing, he received his PhD in Geography from University of Cambridge in 1961. Widely influential, he is among the top 20 most cited authors in the humanities. In addition, he is the world’s most cited academic geographer … and the author of many books and essays that have been prominent in the development of modern geography as a discipline. His work has contributed greatly to broad social and political debate, most recently he has been credited with helping to bring back social class and Marxist methods as serious methodological tools in the critique of global capitalism, particularly in its neoliberal form.”
² Professor of Sustainable Development in the Centre for Environmental Strategy (CES) at the University of Surrey Economics and Commissioner UK Sustainable Development Commission.
Deffernishun:
The Values Australian Dictionary of Slang defines a Bogan as:
“ One who lives elsewhere than, or has interests different from, oneself. Melbournite. Dickhead.”
Mothers and farters right around Australia are hailing the ascension of celebrity bogan, Julia Gillard, to the Prime Ministership.
“ Oi’m jesso heppy that moy liddle Ashlyn will growup knowin’ that theirs noreson she carmpy Priminerser wahn die,” said Ashlyn’s father, Jayden Fondu, of Lamington West. “That there Juliard Gillette is a reel roll mottle fer yunsters and kiddy zevrywhere. Swat Oi sayed to young Brooklyn wen we was screamin’ ow guts out at the foody. ‘Yer doanaffter be a poof or a snob ter tell uvver peeple wodderdo. Youse girls ‘ave godder chanst now. Santa’s come down the chimbley wif a nurly chrissie pressie. How oarsome is that? You gopher it, girl!”
“ Doughfergit Gage, ow bewful li’l boy,” chewed the bogan children’s mother, Hailey. “Iss prufe. Even a deadset blue bogan can run the cuntry so vere’s nuffink none of ow kids cunt do.”
“ Strewth, too bloody right, cobber,” added the children’s other father, Logan Pavlova, quickly glassing his best mate, Landon. “Tudday, drag racin’ an’ a big-nigh-doubt at Mackers… Termorrer — the Lodge!”
Gillard is believed to be in fact the first Bogan to become Prime Minister, Head of Government, or Head of State anywhere in the known universe ever.
There is expected to be a run on the following children’s names. Prospective parents are adivsed to get their orders in early:
Tory, Ethan, Kyle, Aiden, Josh, Tyler, Zack, Kai, Xander, Troy.
Brody, Madison, Alyssa, Chloe, Mia, Brook, Trinity, Riley, Jade, Leah.
Or Doreen:
“Wot’s in a name?” she sez.
‘Struth, I dunno.
Billo is just as good as Romeo.
She may be Juli-er or Juli-et–
‘E loves ‘er yet.
If she’s the tart ‘e wants, then she’s ‘is queen,
Names never count . . . But ar, I like “Doreen!”
(From ‘The Song of the Sentimental Bloke’ – C. J. Dennis)
Prime Minister Gillard is expected to move into the Lodge shortly after August 28* to play house with First Mate, Tim Mathieson. Fathers around the country hope that the PM’s example of unmarried bliss will catch on and save them a fortune in weddings, meaning they can extend the bar and the barbie area and buy that boat they’ve always dreamed of.
* Note: The punters are strongly favouring August 28 as the election date. Sportingbet now has August 28 at $2.50, August 7 and 14 at $6.00, August 21 at $7.00, any date after November 27 at $8.00 and September 4 at $10.00
UPDATE: The odds have collapsed down on August 14 to $2.10, with August 28 easing to $2.75! Probably something to do with some agreement being made. August 21 is at $5.50, August 7 at $7.00 Apparently nothing else is worth looking at. Labor $1.25 vs $3.50
Sir Roger supposes that, given he is the default custodian of Australian Values, he is bound to comment on the recent burst of enthusiasm in Canberra.
The lesson to be learnt from it all is Don’t Let Unionists and the NSW Right Drink the Red Cordial. (They make such a mess all over the place.)
First,
we’d like to see the résumés of the people who have been advising Kevin Rudd for the last six months.
My god, there has rarely been such a display of collective stupidity, incompetence and/or self-serving inhumanity in federal politics since … since … since Abbott & Costello, Sir Foppling Downer, Ruddock the Nazgûl, the tame but dreadful Keelty and, perhaps, DIC Correll, gave advice to John Howard.
Rudd was a joke for most of his leadership. And the joke was that he thought people voted for him. He thought, or came to believe, that people voted for him because they liked him. Pfffftt.
People voted for him so as not to vote for John Howard and his debauched, dissolute, corrupt, self-satisfied, complacent, arrogant party of political brigands.
Rudd’s popularity was high for as long as there was a prospect he would deliver these things. And he did deliver more or less on Work Choices and certainly on the Apology.
But the doubts were there for years as he substituted imprecise promises of distant and uncertain reports-and-inquiries for actual action.
“We are acting decisively to set up an inquiry into whatever.”
Voters have felt betrayed especially about the acute need for action on mental health which has fallen away into nothing.
He looked cowardly when he distanced himself on a number of occasions from the bad news of broken promises which he ruthlessly forced his ministers to deliver while he was conveniently out of town. He didn’t look tough. He looked weasely.
The ascendancy of Tony Abbott has spooked him. And so he tried to look tough on the Mining Super Tax which he described as an example of revolutionising the taxation system which it patently was not. It was just a money grab and everyone knows it. Money to salve the hip-pocket nerve in the run-up to the next election. So we knew he lied about it being a revolution in taxation as long as this was the only recommendation of the hundred or two made by Henry that was taken on board. He recanted about the party political advertising “cancer” so we knew that he was unreliable, and untrustworthy – in fact that he was just another politician.
And he didn’t look strong against the miners. He just looked stupid. It wasn’t David and Goliath it was Dopey and Godzilla.
In his desperation to counter the attraction (he thought) and the traction of Tony Abbott he swung the party to the right. He matched Abbott on asylum seekers and he ditched climate change as policy – possibly the two biggest things that got him elected in the first place.
When he became Prime Minister he had placed the party in the centre right. That left the LibNuts nowhere to go but further to the looney right fringe, where Tony Abbott lives. Brendan Nelson and Malcolm Turnbull tried to contest the centre right and failed. All Rudd had to do was to stick to the centre right – humane social policies with responsible fiscal policies – and he would have been a three-term PM. But he got spooked.
The hilarious moment came, in fact when the night before he jumped he promised that Labor wasn’t going to lurch to the right into Abbott territory on climate change and refugees. But it already had! His asylum-seeker policies were as ruthless, at least in prospect, as John Howard’s, and his proposed action on climate change now non-existent, like Howard’s.
The other amusing thing he said was that he had been elected PM by the voters of Australia. This was not true. You can’t vote for the Prime Minister, just your local member and the factions elect the leader of the party. So the factions just unselected him as leader.
It was the lurch to the right that really opened up the Greens’ opportunity in the centre. They now look like the centre left instead of the looney left fringe. We can all see that they had been right all along, all those years of banging on about climate change and the environment and being ignored as radical-newage-pinko-leftie-drug-crazed-hippy-weirdos.
Oh, and gay.
And it turns out they were right and we should have listened to them way back then. But way back then they were unelectable. Now it is quite conceivable that they will hold the balance of power, possibly even in the Reps. It may be the only way to keep a rein on the ALP’s slide to the right.
Anyway, Rudd broke the faith and broke our hearts and he had to pay for it sooner or later.
The power brokers all have the Labor Party self-destruct DNA. You can see it in NSW every day. Two and a half years in power federally clearly is beyond their capacity to cope with. The boiler was bursting and they longed for the quiet, familiar decades of Opposition.
One doesn’t blame Gillard. She knew Rudd’s number was up (courtesy of the naughty boys who had drunk the red cordial) and she was obliged to take the opportunity.
One doesn’t care whether she’s a woman or not. It’s no big deal. Bandaranaike, Meir, Gandhi, Thatcher, Clark; Boudicca, Mary, Anne, ER, VR, EIIR. Xena. All have come before, elected and unelected, both. We already know for goodness’ sake, that women are up to the task. They always have been. What one does care about is whether she does a good job for the country.
One dislikes her. Especially her awful, grating voice and strident accent. Someone on a radio talkback show said they liked her because she was a good communicator and a straight talker and they were looking forward to the end of all the political spin.
One begs your pardon?
One cannot recall a single time that Gillard ever actually answered a question, or at least the one that was asked. All there ever is with her is spin and slogans and ignoring the question. Here’s an answer I prepared earlier. Over and over and over again. She is a waste of space and a waste of time.
And she is still preferable to Tony Abbott by a long long way.
And if she softens asylum seeker policy and urgently implements real climate change policy and compromises on the mining tax grab and addresses mental health then one might change one’s mind about her.
We don’t deserve this bullshit. We shouldn’t be limited to choosing between the Liars and the Other Liars and the pot-smoking-long-haired-tree-huggers.
There ought to be a law that says anyone who wants to be a politician is banned from running for office and the politicians should be drafted the way juries are.
The question whether the bloodletting was worth it pragmatically (and what else is there in politics?) may be answered by the betting market, although one wasn’t watching before the guillotine fell to know how much tightening there has been.
Betting on the election result is strongly towards Labor. Centrebet has Labor at $1.36 against $3.05; Sportingbet has $1.40 against $2.85.
Top election date betting is for August 28: Centrebet $3, Sportingbet $3.50; September 4: Centrebet $5.50, Sportingbet $5; any date in 2011: Centrebet $6, Sportingbet $5.50. All other dates in 2010 are at longer odds. So the punters apparently expect Gillard to go early while she’s got the new-girl bounce. Hmmm. (Strokes chin)
Recommended: more, more professional, betting analysis, immediate polling results and other entrail sorting available from Possum Pollytics and the Pollbludger. The new-girl bounce is there but would Kevin have won anyway?