-
IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.
Talking Politics
- Thread starter Legends of 2017
- Start date
There are two things people can do that are significant - one is consume less, recycle, reuse, sure. The other far more significant thing is to remove investment in fossil fuels or related industries. If you really want to do something good that will have a real impact, divest your portfolios of all such entities. This includes your superannuation and any other form of investment you have.
How's your superannuation fund and share portfolio looking PT? If you are prepared to put the recycling bins out and not buy a new TV, but any of your financial investments contain these then you are not an environmentalist, conservative or otherwise.
Although it's a self fulfilling loop. The more stuff we consume, the more energy intensive our lifestyle and then the motivation for extraction of materials to create that energy (fossil fuels or otherwise). Super and investments I do take that into account Angry, absolutely. Although I must tell you it was an interesting process finding a 'green' option that didn't package up a whole host of unrelated social agenda I was skeptical of.
And which is the preferable option? Keeping your 10YO car (that you bought as a 5YO used car) until it dies in another 10 years (as in, consuming astronomically less materials and energy in the manufacturing process). Or buying into the consumerist mindset that I must buy a brand new electric car so I can be seen, along with that nice new car smell. I look at Universities too, moving out of perfectly good buildings that have plenty of life left in them. The redevelopment funded by 'green bonds'. The new ones have more 'green credentials' sure. But is it really that green demolishing buildings that still have decades more life left in them, in order to consume a whole lot more resources and carbon emissions in the process of creating those resources? I’m aware that new architectural and engineering techniques are building into the lifecycle of a building that it will one day will be demolished, so they maximise how much of the building’s materials can be reused. Which I am a huge supporter of. I think that is great. But I dunno, it just feels so inherently wrong to me demolishing stuff that still has life in it. I think it’s in my frugal DNA that the throw away disposability mindset just feels so wrong from every angle.
I don't have all the answers, but I sometimes think the green movement has lurched into being a form of consumerism itself in a cruel twist of irony.
Last edited:
I'm going to keep repeating this because we're going to get three years of "Labor's low primary vote" from the media and some posters here who seem in denial of what happened.
Labor won.
It wasn't close.
The Liberals were kicked to the curb, hard.
We have a Labor Government.
Labor won.
It wasn't close.
The Liberals were kicked to the curb, hard.
We have a Labor Government.
The low primary vote as being a problem is dumb analysis. It rests on the old middle and upper class V working class factory workers. Thats gone for good. Things change, voting patterns change.
This guy got it months ago:
Things are changing. This election does reflect a lot of dissatisfaction with the two-party system. Barrie Cassidy predicting this will be the last majority government in his lifetime.
Good article on the New Zealand model:
johnmenadue.com
" According to Pew Research, NZ has the least dissatisfaction with government of all developed countries. "
Good article on the New Zealand model:
Peter Fry - NZ style voting for Australia? - Pearls and Irritations
Voters who live in 'safe' seats are used to a situation where our views at election time become even more irrelevant than they usually are.
johnmenadue.com
" According to Pew Research, NZ has the least dissatisfaction with government of all developed countries. "
Who's in denial?
The facts are right there.
Labor won the election - no problem there and they will most likely gain a majority
Labor did so via preferences rather than through primary voting
The coalition were destroyed in the election
All 3 statements are true. What I am highlighting, is that I hope the ALP consider those voters opinions that didn't vote for them via primary voting. I get your point of view, but ultimately its not people like you that decide any election, its those in the middle and in this instance those voters have clearly rejected both the coalition and the ALP in primary voting. Its a clear message being given to the major parties.
Think of it like the French elections over the last 20 years. There has been a significant growth in the french voting for other parties, including Marine Le Pens party. Many have used that as a vote to send a message to the government, before the final vote when it comes down to 2 parties, when they vote for the sitting party. The % of the vote against the mainstream parties there has been growing because the mainstream parties continued to ignore their messaging to the point where Marine Le Pen (yes the racist) almost got into power in their recent election.
You can stick your head in the sand if you want, but what you will see if thats the case, is a swing away from the ALP and further towards independents at the next election. Now they may then be able to govern with a minority government at that time too, but its far easier to be able to govern with a majority rather than having to make deals with independents.
Indications are that the ALP will take a consultative approach with the independents even if they achieve a majority.
I tend to agree with his assessment.Things are changing. This election does reflect a lot of dissatisfaction with the two-party system. Barrie Cassidy predicting this will be the last majority government in his lifetime.
Good article on the New Zealand model:
Peter Fry - NZ style voting for Australia? - Pearls and Irritations
Voters who live in 'safe' seats are used to a situation where our views at election time become even more irrelevant than they usually are.
" According to Pew Research, NZ has the least dissatisfaction with government of all developed countries. "
And if it’s accepted as the norm in our political culture. My hope is that it gives some flexibility like European countries for parties to form from a few more divergent viewpoints and seek representation. That would be a long evolution and probably a harder prospect with our current electoral process.
Look how many parties make up the Swiss house for example. You have parties like our main two (largely centre left and centre right). You have right-wing nationalists (that actually are probably slightly left of centre on economics, but right in other things), Christian Conservatives of the DLP or Fred Nile type persuasion. There are two green parties. One like ours of the left, very socially liberal variety, one that is green, but more conservative on social and economic issues than the left greens. There are literal socialists and so on. It means far more nuanced and divergent views are heard on the front stage. Whereas ours are thrashed out in the party rooms. And going back to what others said earlier in the conversation. It gets us out of the left-right dichotomy. People are more complex than that. And under the Swiss system (and some others) this complexity is better reflected.
It is one reason Swiss people have some of the highest satisfaction ratings for their political representation. They all feel heard and they actually get to see all these divergent, nuanced voices on the front stage. There is also an element of direct democracy built into the Swiss system too. It all results in Swiss people feeling closer to the process and as I say, they feel heard.
Last edited:
Which would be smart, as clearly want the independents are selling is what the public want. This is why IMO the ALP need to over achieve on the environment, over and above what they have stated in their policies.
Reducing consumerism / consumption / demand is the biggest handle. It drives everything. It’s capitalisms raison d'etre.
Absolutely it makes more sense to drive an ICE until it wears out vs replacing it with an ev. But the real answer is less driving with massive incentives for shared resources / public transport etc and disincentives for the opposite. Working locally / from home would help drive this and be a palatable policy to incentivise but watch the self interest scream.
Absolutely agree RE. Big supporter here of shared resources like public transport. Even living in one of the smaller Australian cities with less extensive public transport, I purchased my first house (which we are still in) with that practicality in mind. I actually enjoy it. Down time sitting on the bus (ferries just starting to be reestablished in Hobart too) either just watching the world or reading.
Definitely not a landslide, but definitely huge paradigm shift. This country will not be paying lip service to acting on climate change any more.
In fact, Labor might be forced kicking and screaming to do much more. Dr Monique Ryan was on TV yesterday saying she will push Labor to change their 2030 reduction targets from 43% to 60%.
As for the Liberals, I honestly do not see them changing in the short term. There will be no self-reflection because they probably think they can win in 2025. I can see them shifting further to the right with many of their so-called moderates gone. I hope I am wrong though.
Matt Kean a beacon amongst the RWNJs.
www.theguardian.com
Liberals still in Canberra must find their moderate voice and assertively represent the centre | Matt Kean
Some say the ‘base’ won’t let us do more on climate or gender equity but let’s be clear: traditional Liberals watch more ABC than Sky After Dark
It mightn't be a "Landslide" to the ALP but it certainly is a "Landslide" away from the Libs.
If they want to remain relevant they'll need to change their mindset on many of their policies, especially their environmental & fiscal policies.
They're currently too beholden to the coal & fossil fuel industries.
If they want to remain relevant they'll need to change their mindset on many of their policies, especially their environmental & fiscal policies.
They're currently too beholden to the coal & fossil fuel industries.
Monique Ryan can say whatever she wants but the fact is that if the ALP win lower house majority she will have little influence on ALP climate change policy. The ALP will need to worry about the Senate cross bench; that is where the road blocks will be.
<
Ben Roberts Smith
|
Assange !!
>
