I’ve long thought that we live in a ‘counter-intuitive’ era, in which much of what we are told to believe or practice does not feel true or convincing to people whose education, circumstances or experience is different from that of our progressive, soft-left, baby-boomer generation (e.g.
I don't know about Menken, but liked Ambrose Bierce's definition of politics: "A strife of interests masquerading as a contest of principles." or Jay Leno: "Politics is just show business for ugly people." or Dick Tuck after being defeated in a Californian Senate primary: "The people have spoke-the bastards."
Why am I joking? This is serious, and in my view, America is reaping the rewards of changes in society since the Reagan years-including exploding inequality, appalling corporate ethics, disdain for multi-lateral organisations like the UN, and poor rankings on most empirical measures of socio-economic well-being. Together with uncontrolled social media and gutted newsrooms the battlers are easy pickings for a Trump, who I thought Michael described in overly generous terms. Further, as Michael intimates supercilious lack of empathy from the "intelligentsia" is unhelpful.
Alarmingly, we have uncritical, obsequious, bi-partisan support for the US alliance, while well-credentialled critics like Paul Keating and Gareth Evans say the government is out of touch on foreign policy-particularly in reference to that alliance and our attitude to China. Albanese , Marles and crew continue to parrot the Man of Steel's assurance that it is based on shared values.-values that have presumably shaped the development of contemporary US society. We are also frequently reminded of how much we owe our powerful mate for saving us from Japan during world war 2-justified gratitude but they did need a base in Australia to tackle Japan [I thought the US might have eased tension by announcing support for the rearmament of Japan in Nanking.] Be that as it may, it is very hard to reconcile the US of the 1940's and 50's with Trump's America--affordable housing, progressive taxation that moderated extremes of wealth and poverty, the Marshal Plan, Nelson Eddy and Jeannette McDonald, creation of the UN after defanging the earlier League of Nations--and so it went-apple pie and cream.
At the very least, the state of the US demands an informed, hard-nosed review of the AUKUS submarine mirage--the review that should have happened before the Albanese government waved through the deal negotiated secretly by Scotty from marketing, that great statesman. As for me, I hear that CAE is about to offer a trifecta at very good rates for Port Melbourne battlers-Mandarin language classes, Cantonese cooking demonstrations, and seminars on the British and GFrench remodeling of the Summer palace during the second opium war in 1860. I think I'll sign up.
Thanks for this. I think you have put words to what many of us are thinking and feeling.
How can so many women vote for an sexual predator and abuser?
How can so many poor workers vote for a rich millionaire?
How can so many people who worked hard for whatever money they have vote for someone who just inherited it?
How can so many patriots vote for a selfish, self-seeking, self-aggrandising individualist?
How can so many Christians vote for an amoral unrepentant sinner?
How can so many people who care for others vote for someone who doesn't give a stuff about abody else?
How can so many people who want to do the right thing vote for someone who has no concept of right or wrong?
In short, how can so many good people vote for someone so bad?
The only explanation I have read that begins to make sense puts it down to a "new tribalism" in which you become a member of a tribe and anything anybody in your tribe says or does is OK and anything the other tribe does or says is ipso facto wrong.
There was a strong element of tribalism in Hitler's message too.
And, I think, in the current Middle East conflict.
I don't know about Menken, but liked Ambrose Bierce's definition of politics: "A strife of interests masquerading as a contest of principles." or Jay Leno: "Politics is just show business for ugly people." or Dick Tuck after being defeated in a Californian Senate primary: "The people have spoke-the bastards."
Why am I joking? This is serious, and in my view, America is reaping the rewards of changes in society since the Reagan years-including exploding inequality, appalling corporate ethics, disdain for multi-lateral organisations like the UN, and poor rankings on most empirical measures of socio-economic well-being. Together with uncontrolled social media and gutted newsrooms the battlers are easy pickings for a Trump, who I thought Michael described in overly generous terms. Further, as Michael intimates supercilious lack of empathy from the "intelligentsia" is unhelpful.
Alarmingly, we have uncritical, obsequious, bi-partisan support for the US alliance, while well-credentialled critics like Paul Keating and Gareth Evans say the government is out of touch on foreign policy-particularly in reference to that alliance and our attitude to China. Albanese , Marles and crew continue to parrot the Man of Steel's assurance that it is based on shared values.-values that have presumably shaped the development of contemporary US society. We are also frequently reminded of how much we owe our powerful mate for saving us from Japan during world war 2-justified gratitude but they did need a base in Australia to tackle Japan [I thought the US might have eased tension by announcing support for the rearmament of Japan in Nanking.] Be that as it may, it is very hard to reconcile the US of the 1940's and 50's with Trump's America--affordable housing, progressive taxation that moderated extremes of wealth and poverty, the Marshal Plan, Nelson Eddy and Jeannette McDonald, creation of the UN after defanging the earlier League of Nations--and so it went-apple pie and cream.
At the very least, the state of the US demands an informed, hard-nosed review of the AUKUS submarine mirage--the review that should have happened before the Albanese government waved through the deal negotiated secretly by Scotty from marketing, that great statesman. As for me, I hear that CAE is about to offer a trifecta at very good rates for Port Melbourne battlers-Mandarin language classes, Cantonese cooking demonstrations, and seminars on the British and GFrench remodeling of the Summer palace during the second opium war in 1860. I think I'll sign up.
Dear Michael
Thanks for this. I think you have put words to what many of us are thinking and feeling.
How can so many women vote for an sexual predator and abuser?
How can so many poor workers vote for a rich millionaire?
How can so many people who worked hard for whatever money they have vote for someone who just inherited it?
How can so many patriots vote for a selfish, self-seeking, self-aggrandising individualist?
How can so many Christians vote for an amoral unrepentant sinner?
How can so many people who care for others vote for someone who doesn't give a stuff about abody else?
How can so many people who want to do the right thing vote for someone who has no concept of right or wrong?
In short, how can so many good people vote for someone so bad?
The only explanation I have read that begins to make sense puts it down to a "new tribalism" in which you become a member of a tribe and anything anybody in your tribe says or does is OK and anything the other tribe does or says is ipso facto wrong.
There was a strong element of tribalism in Hitler's message too.
And, I think, in the current Middle East conflict.
Ian Robinson
13/11/24