Jump to content

Aussies LXIV - Invasion Day Edition


The Winged Shadow

Recommended Posts

I do find it amusing that the push is coming from the science denying radical right of the party. Are they actually going to come to the conclusion that the problem is they haven't been far enough right?


Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do find it amusing that the push is coming from the science denying radical right of the party. Are they actually going to come to the conclusion that the problem is they haven't been far enough right?

Possibly. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Libs plus their mates in talkback radio and Murdoch's rags crucified Labor for being too unstable or whatever, now they are doing the exact same thing.



Seeing the Libs implode is brilliant. Still I don't think that it is a good look when a sitting PM is removed by the party though


Link to comment
Share on other sites

hahaha the defence minister just accidentally said "I believe the team of Tony Abbott and Julia Gillard is the best team to lead this country".

:lmao:

Oh the irony.

If this is what we have to look forward to over the next few days I will need more popcorn.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I will never vote for a party that claims that genetically modified organisms are an 'unacceptable threat'. I can't stand anti-scientific drivel. I would vote for pretty much anyone over the greens.

Nothing anti-scientific about their stance on GMO. If anything, they want more scientific input. Most of the current GMO research is based on producer funded research which tend to focus on GMO's effect on consumers (so far its good news in that it doesn't have ill effects). Greens stance is more about the wider impact GMOs have on the local ecology/environment and potential long term impact on consumers (which is not well researched, given its still a relatively new thing, although i am sure some smart cookie somewhere is onto it already!). Their aim is to get more independent research involved and to develop standards for quality control and label products so consumers can make in informed decision. While there is enough research in the area to conclude that GMO's aren't harmful to humans (in the short term), it's wider impact and long term consequences are not well understood. Their stance is more based on the fact that there are many unidentified (and thus, unmanaged) risk at the moment with GMOs.

While you can certainly blame them for taking rather extreme stance on these kind of things, "anti-scientific drivel" is not one of them.

Edit: Realistically, the Green's risk management strategy leaves a lot to be desired. They are far too conservative when it comes to these sort of things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Australians Against Democracy, an occasional, curated series:

Adam Creighton:

Adam Creighton (@Adam_Creighton) January 31, 2015

Whatever outcome in #qldvotes, scary harbinger of Australia's decline. Economic literacy dwindling at the time we need it most #ignorance.

(earlier, fancier effort here)

Tom Elliot:

There is a solution. Let’s agree on a set of truly important problems — mounting debt, population growth, lack of jobs, rising health care expenditure, inefficient welfare and an inadequate defence force — and appoint a committee of eminent and competent Australians to sort it out.

A benign dictatorship if you will.

This committee would consist of experts in their fields without political axes to grind. It’d need at least five years to complete its tasks during which time elected governments could administrate, but take no major decisions.

Tim Flannery and Catriona Wallace:

Can citizens ever hope to take back political power? If so, how? The example of Cincinnatus should inspire us, while the fate of Gaius Gracchus should warn us that individual leaders will always be vulnerable. But an army of Cincinnati – respected citizens willing to give up a little of their time and resources to serve their country in politics – is far harder to destroy. If such people could be marshalled into an organisation tailor-made to project the popular will into politics, they stand a chance of gathering such authority as to become invincible.

Any group of people intent on exerting political influence requires a declared purpose. Once formulated, the Cincinnati’s declaration should become the yardstick against which policy and legislation are measured. A concise, clearly understood statement of purpose that centres on respect for people across the generations, on a better environment, and on a sustainable economy would need to be carefully drafted, and even more carefully refreshed. Most political parties have such statements, and in many respects they are broadly similar. The difference is that the statement of purpose of the Cincinnati would serve as an unswerving guide for the nation’s political decision-making. Its power would be unprecedented, except perhaps by the constitution.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...