Skin deep
Nothing is more disturbing to true democrats than apathy - you see it on the hustings and all of us who are there say "Please please... vote and think" ( The last thing any one of us we really don't want you to say is " blow the lot of you " )We all hate it when a donkey , and anti authoritarian or a breathing stone walks past . But its happening more and more .
The greens , while often having their hearts in the right place , capture part of this anti-authoritarian and reactionary mood by placing themselves apart.
Worse still, it seems , the Dem and labour can't distance themselves from the blatant reactionaries and antiauthoritarian message elements -Do they too prefer simplicity to practicality - if politics is not practical and building on the past -- its useless ( Their preferences go to greens with predictable monotony )
Playing up to skin deep amongst those who would rather not think or vote is treacherous territory . The Democrats show their ignorance of the vast majority of country people's common sense by choosing to go with the greens on all fronts - no diversity , no depth . Short term gain should be seen as short and shallow look-
The simple birdbath is very attractive,and you get a good splash effect, but there is nowhere to go once you get there.
The established opposition parties seem to think that simpleness is next to godliness -- the winning margin compromise that gets you over the line .But Does the labor party know what it stands for once it has got power this way ???? I hope they get clear message from Australians that they are not as stupid as the superficial margins may suggest.
Shakespeare ( Richard 3) got it right about when and why people really listen .
Seeking the superficial won't help Labor improve its credibility on environment in the country either.
What I can't work out is why the Democrats want to ride the greens ticket into oblivion ( Chipp would have none of this seeking after shallow stuffing stuff). Even Labor think they are going to win long term by backing the greens - great ideas, but no practical sound sense. It does labor no good to be so predictably reactionary .
If Labor took the liberals on credibly about the environment and stopped mimicking the greens and the wannabes --they could win votes in the country - where it really matters .
Labor could win on its own ( in key regions) if only its environ policy was more than skin deep . As it did in Qld in the early part of last century . If Labor wins on green preferences this year it will only be because the city is growing in influence and superficiality on tough complex earthcare matters is more satisfying for many, than substance.
As the dumb Kyoto call says so well - Thge big need is " something" that govts "should do" ... What????? so ...we we can just " " do what we BW like" .
2007 will be the year to see whether the breathing stones will say a word in the greens defense: clever 07 or coveritallupwithgovtshoulddosomethingcrap 07. 2007, now the people have some new antireactionary choices , could prove to be an election to show whether the greens are more than skin deep and are truly seen to be so.
The greens , while often having their hearts in the right place , capture part of this anti-authoritarian and reactionary mood by placing themselves apart.
Worse still, it seems , the Dem and labour can't distance themselves from the blatant reactionaries and antiauthoritarian message elements -Do they too prefer simplicity to practicality - if politics is not practical and building on the past -- its useless ( Their preferences go to greens with predictable monotony )
Playing up to skin deep amongst those who would rather not think or vote is treacherous territory . The Democrats show their ignorance of the vast majority of country people's common sense by choosing to go with the greens on all fronts - no diversity , no depth . Short term gain should be seen as short and shallow look-
The simple birdbath is very attractive,and you get a good splash effect, but there is nowhere to go once you get there.
The established opposition parties seem to think that simpleness is next to godliness -- the winning margin compromise that gets you over the line .But Does the labor party know what it stands for once it has got power this way ???? I hope they get clear message from Australians that they are not as stupid as the superficial margins may suggest.
Shakespeare ( Richard 3) got it right about when and why people really listen .
Seeking the superficial won't help Labor improve its credibility on environment in the country either.
What I can't work out is why the Democrats want to ride the greens ticket into oblivion ( Chipp would have none of this seeking after shallow stuffing stuff). Even Labor think they are going to win long term by backing the greens - great ideas, but no practical sound sense. It does labor no good to be so predictably reactionary .
If Labor took the liberals on credibly about the environment and stopped mimicking the greens and the wannabes --they could win votes in the country - where it really matters .
Labor could win on its own ( in key regions) if only its environ policy was more than skin deep . As it did in Qld in the early part of last century . If Labor wins on green preferences this year it will only be because the city is growing in influence and superficiality on tough complex earthcare matters is more satisfying for many, than substance.
As the dumb Kyoto call says so well - Thge big need is " something" that govts "should do" ... What????? so ...we we can just " " do what we BW like" .
2007 will be the year to see whether the breathing stones will say a word in the greens defense: clever 07 or coveritallupwithgovtshoulddosomethingcrap 07. 2007, now the people have some new antireactionary choices , could prove to be an election to show whether the greens are more than skin deep and are truly seen to be so.
posted by Little John at 12:40 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home