Showing posts with label voting. Show all posts
Showing posts with label voting. Show all posts

Wednesday, June 12, 2013

Seize The Defeat

So, an offensive menu was printed up for a Mal Brough fundraiser. And we are, naturally, in quite a flap about it.

And yes, fair enough. It was gross. It was sexist. It was nasty. It was a shitty joke, and it wasn't even original.

And look, I have no problem with anyone asserting that Mal Brough is a sleazebag. There's the whole James Ashby affair, and oh yeah, that little thing called the NT Intervention. Believe me, I need no convincing that Mal Brough is a first-class dickferret of the very highest purity.

But here's the thing about menugate, or quailgate, or big red boxgate or whatever bullshit it's being called:

Tony Abbott will still win.

It has been blindingly obvious for some time now that the Labor Party is going to go down in flames in September. And yet somehow, the True Believers keep seizing on moments like Brough's menu, claiming that this time,. THIS time, the Coalition's goose is truly cooked. The voters simply won't stand for such appalling misogyny, the True Believers squawk. Women won't be treated like this anymore, they scream. Now that the Liberals have shown their TRUE colours, Julia Gillard's dignity and toughness and determination will win the day and all will be well.

I am sorry, True Believers: all will not be well. And every time you say that THIS will be the straw that breaks the camel's back, a new batch of polls come out and show that the camel is doing a buck-and-wing all over Labor's expiring corpse.

The reason we keep going through this is that the True Believers, justifiably appalled as they are by Tony Abbott's appalling character, cannot conceive of any other explanation for Labor's subterranean popularity than that the electorate simply doesn't UNDERSTAND how bad the Opposition is. Once they do, the story goes, everything will turn around.

Once again, I am sorry to be the one to break it to you: they know. Everyone knows. They've all seen him, they've all heard him, they've all read about him. And they either don't care, or see what you think are character flaws as virtues.

When someone you hate does something you disapprove of, it's seductively easy to assume that this will cause everyone else to hate them too, because you've been hating them all along. It's seductively easy to assume that everyone else thinks the way you do, and the only reason they disagree with you is they don't have all the facts.

Sadly, sometimes people have all the facts and still think you're wrong.

Sadly, sometimes people are bastards, and they like it when other bastards are in charge.

Sadly, Tony Abbott is going to be prime minister, and whatever miracle it might take to prevent that is going to have to be a hell of a lot more volcanic than a shitty sexist joke on a menu of murky antecedents.

And given that fact, why should we keep on making excuses for Julia Gillard's hapless Washington Generals of a government?

The fact is, Gillard ain't all that. Her asylum seeker policy is brutality embraced in the name of expediency. She made a mess of the mining tax in her haste to cave to big business and get the issue off her desk. She is continuing our pal Brough's racist intervention. She gave a nice big smack to single parents the same day she electrified the world by bawling out Abbott in parliament. Her stance on marriage equality enrages pretty much all her staunchest supporters. And her government has done many good and admirable things, she is singularly bad at turning them to her advantage, which, whether it be the media's fault, or Kevin Rudd's, or Abbott's, is nonetheless a fact.

So why should we on the nominally "left" side of politics be as eager as we have been to gloss over all that?

Well obviously it's because, for all her faults, Gillard is better than Abbott. No doubt about that. Though Labor has done some stuff badly, the Coalition will be ten times worse, and we have to fall in behind Gillard to stop Abbott getting in at any cost. Wise words.

But the fact is, Abbott IS going to get in. So what's the point of being "better than Abbott" when you're not going to win anyway?

While Labor had a chance, it made sense to bend our energies to supporting them, to keep the Liberals at bay. But that's failed. The Liberals have stormed the parapet. The shields are down. Labor is dead in the water.

So trying to keep Abbott out is now a lost cause. And any attempt to downplay the failings of Labor in the interests of realpolitik is no longer a brave stab at bringing about the lesser of two evils, but rather an exercise in futility that simply continues the relentless lowering of standards in political discourse.

Consider: if you are backing "crappy" because it's better than "crappier", when "crappy" has no chance of winning, you're not staving off "crappier", you're just ensuring that "crappy" becomes the best we can ever hope for.

So why not stop standing up for "crappy"? Why not starting calling out bad behaviour, bad policy, bad government, no matter which party is engaging in it? The partisan battle is over, let's redirect our energies into demanding better from ALL sides of politics. Let's make it clear that we want to raise standards.

Most of all, let's rediscover our integrity and commit to standing up, in all circumstances, for what we really believe, for what we think is RIGHT, rather than desperately trying to rationalise support for better-than-Abbott.

And hey, we've got preferential voting. We'll be putting better-than-Abbott ahead of Abbott anyway. Don't worry, as long as better-than-Abbott has a lower number next to it on your ballot paper, you've discharged your responsibilities to the temple of low expectations.

But when we're out in the world, fighting and arguing and debating and lobbying and tweeting and blogging and emailing ministers, let's stop shouting our disapproval of "them" while we whisper our disapproval of "us". Let's make clear that right is right, and wrong is wrong, and while political realities obviously have always to be recognised, we're not going to support any politician who flat-out reverses the two.

Right now, my fellow travellers on the Lost Bus Of The Left, we are down. We're outnumbered and outgunned. But even at this moment we can be heard, and we can make clear what we want. Even with our worst enemy in the Lodge, we can articulate how we want this country to be better.

And when the worm turns and we find ourselves up and about again, we can make sure that those who would represent us know that we want them to fight for what's right, not just for what's slightly less wrong.

We're about to get beaten. But if we can stand up, we don't have to be broken as well.





Thursday, April 19, 2012

Why not?

Why not vote for me in the Sydney Writers' Centre Best Blog Competition?

Am I right?

I'm right, right?

You'd be voting for a blog that:

- is number one in the world in regards to how-not-to-be-a-rapist tutorials

- has more blasphemy per square centimetre than all industry leaders

- is as cute as a button

- uses no child labour

- makes your breasts firmer and more inviting if read daily.

Vote now!

Or don't!

It's really up to you!

It is not my place to be prescriptive!

But vote now!

Unless you don't want to!

!!!!

Sunday, August 22, 2010

Musings on a Sort-of Election

So, election day having passed, as we wait out the six or seven months it will apparently take to decide who is the not-very-legitimate prime minister of our country, allow me to let you in on a few thoughts and observations.

Firstly, anyone who says things like "the Australian people have spoken, and said they don't want either party" or "the people have said a pox on all their houses" and variations thereof, should really, really, really STOP.

No, the Australian people did not "decide" to have a hung parliament. Apart from the informals, every single person actually voted for someone. WE all decided we DID want someone to be in government. I guarantee you there were no votes counted for "I want both parties to almost get a majority but not quite so they have to negotiate with independents". Trust me on this: people who voted Labor wanted Labor. People who voted Liberal wanted Liberal. People who voted Green wanted Green. People who voted Family First wanted a lobotomy.

The media commentary on this election seems to be suggesting some weird conspiracy where all the voters got together and divided up their votes - "You all vote Labor, you all vote Liberal, you guys in the middle vote Green, let's screw 'em right up!" This did not, in fact, happen. Those who voted for a particular party did not do it in the hope that enough people would vote for ANOTHER party so as to ensure the party they chose did not achieve a majority. Everyone just voted for who they wanted, and not enough people wanted either side. It's just MATHS, people.

Do you think we WANTED this, mainstream media? Bitch, please.

Secondly, an informal vote is NOT a donkey vote. An informal vote is one where the ballot paper is filled out incorrectly, or not filled out at all, or where the voter drew little caricatures of 18th-century English playwrights in each box. Informal votes are not counted.

A donkey vote is one where the voter, rather than numbering the boxes in order of their own preference, simply writes "1" in the top box and numbers them in the order they appear on the paper. Donkey votes ARE counted, because they are legitimate votes i.e. NOT INFORMAL.

Therefore, anyone claiming this election had "an unprecedented number of donkey votes" or "Mark Latham urged everyone to cast donkey votes" needs to be informed of their own ignorance, and possibly lightly slapped, particularly if they're a political journalist and should fricking well know better.

Thirdly, it has been brought to my attention that Bob Katter is a significant figure in the determination of the next government of Australia. Bob Katter:

"I mean, if you could imagine 20 or 30 crocodiles up there on the roof, and if all that roof was illumination, and saying that we wouldn't see anything in this room because of a few croco-roaches up there," he said.

"Are you telling me seriously that the world is going to warm because there's 400 parts per million of CO2 up there?"



OK.

No, seriously, what?

Monday, July 27, 2009

In the Adelaide Advertiser...

K.M. Gunn of Lower Mitcham writes:

"REPORTS about the possibility of raising the age at which a driving licence can be obtained are at odds with other reports which indicate Labor is looking at lowering the voting age to 16 years (The Advertiser, yesterday).

Sixteen-year-olds are not adults, not even if they are in the workforce and paying taxes.

They are physically, emotionally and intellectually too young to drive.

They are also emotionally and intellectually too young to vote, especially under a system which compels people to attend at the ballot box. Any suggestion that voting should be "voluntary" in this age group would be a further erosion of democracy.

There will be howls of outrage from some young people, who will claim they are mature enough and responsible enough. The very fact they believe they can take on adult responsibilities is an excellent indication that they are not sufficiently mature to actually do so.

Young people are more inclined to vote Labor. Under our system it is not uncommon for people to vote the way they first voted for the rest of their lives. This is because they are compelled to attend the ballot box and believe that they must vote as a consequence.

Moves to lower the voting age should be seen for what they are. If introduced and we retain the system of compulsion, then we may as well forget about having an effective Opposition. Why would we want to erode democracy still further?"

Yeah! Damn straight, K.M.! How can we let people who are physically too young to drive behind the wheel, with their stunted arms and not-yet-open eyes?

And of all the harebrained schemes, allowing people who are more inclined to vote Labor to vote! NOBODY who is more inclined to vote Labor should be allowed to vote! Isn't denying the vote to those who are more likely to support a certain party one of the cornerstones of our democracy?

I especially like K.M.'s "The very fact they believe they can take on adult responsibilities is an excellent indication that they are not sufficiently mature to actually do so".

So true. I propose that from now on, only those who believe they are incapable of driving and voting should be allowed to do so.

THAT will fix our society.