• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

AusPoliGAF |OT| Boats? What Boats?

Status
Not open for further replies.
BSJ_D1EIcAAp0w0.jpg

Before 4:30pm is re-runs of Sesame Street so everyone can learn how to count.
 

elfinke

Member
If by funny you mean depressing, I agree.

Yeah, I love that added perspective that economists world-over provide whenever they comment on us. It's a shame that there is a cynicism towards experts that is almost intrinsic in Aust society and it gets in the way of decent conversation all too often.

It's all too easy to be a big fish in our little pond, it would seem.
 

Fredescu

Member

bomma_man

Member
Yeah, I love that added perspective that economists world-over provide whenever they comment on us. It's a shame that there is a cynicism towards experts that is almost intrinsic in Aust society and it gets in the way of decent conversation all too often.

It's all too easy to be a big fish in our little pond, it would seem.

I think that's true anywhere. There is not a mainstream, sane economist (so not Judith Sloan) that advocates current Republican/Tory/EU economic policy. There is a massive gap between the prevailing thought in the political and academic spheres in that field.

On another depressing topic, the high court decisions re refugees are so fucked. Apparently the executive can detain people indefinitely as long as the detention is 'non-punitive', even if that 'non-punitive' detention is found to be factually inhumane. Makes sense! The fact that Gummow J in his dissent used a passage from Scalia of all people to illustrate how much of an intrusion into individual liberty this is is truly a sign of how far off the deep end we've gone.
 

elfinke

Member
Mark Latham made some very interesting points on this in an article about climate change denial: http://www.afr.com/p/lifestyle/review/climate_change_denial_not_just_for_sFAw16a7QU34KIj2tmN4eJ

Basically our egalitarianism has made us wary of "experts" to the point that we often think we know better.

Interesting words from Latham, thanks. As a country, we really dodged a bullet with him.

Related is this pretty great article from Alecia Simmonds earlier this year:

Why Australia Hates Thinkers said:
In contrast to France, where philosophers often grace the covers of Le Monde, and England where Slavoj Zizek writes regular columns in The Guardian Weekly. In Australia, we have Peter Hartcher on anti-Gillard autopilot and the bile-flecked bleating of shock-jocks like Alan Jones.

Each week I watch Q&A praying for an expert, begging for someone who knows what they're talking about. And each week I get Joe Hildebrand accompanied by a flurry of tweets by the emotionally unstable. In fact Nick Osbaldiston and Jean-Paul Gagnon recently found in their research on Q&A that only 5 per cent of panellists since 2008 had a research background. Even in an entire show devoted to education issues, Professor Gonski sat in the shadows while Pyne and Garrett proffered glib inanities and vapid insults. No one learned anything.

My problem is not that our public sphere harbours ill-educated members (like the imbecilic Andrew Bolt who never made it past first-year uni). I think we need commentators from all walks of life. The problem is that as a country we are hostile to those who are well-educated. We prefer home-spun wisdom to years of research. Our language is peppered with vitriol reserved for those who think for a living: "chattering classes", "latte-sipping libertarians", "intellectual elites" and now Nick Cater's most unlovely term "bunyip elite". If we want to emphasise the importance of something we say that the issue "is not just academic". Any idea that takes longer than a nano-second to understand is howled down. Or perhaps, more precisely, any idea that threatens conservative orthodoxy is consigned to the divine irrelevancy of the academy. I've never heard Tony Abbott be told that his Rhodes scholarship and privileged tertiary education meant he was out of touch with the common man. Calling someone an "intellectual elite" is simply a way of ridiculing those who think for a living about how the world can be a fairer place.

...

Perhaps there's a link between the myth of Australian egalitarianism and anti-intellectualism. Australian history is popularly told as a story of democracy, equality and classlessness that broke from England's stuffy, poncy, aristocratic elitism. We're a place where hard yakka, not birth, will earn you success and by hard yakka we don't mean intellectual labour. Although, of course, equality is a great goal, we've interpreted it to mean cultural conformity rather than a redistribution of wealth and power. The lowest common denominator exerts a tyrannical sway and tall poppies are lopped with blood-soaked scythes. Children learn from an early age that being clever is a source of shame. Ignorance is cool.

There's also no room for cleverness in our models of masculinity or femininity. For women, intelligence equates with a dangerous independence that doesn't sit well with your role as a docile adoring fan to the boys at the pub. It's equated with sexual unattractiveness. And for men, carrying a book and using words longer than one syllable is a form of gender treason. It's as good as wearing bumless chaps to a suburban barbecue. Real blokes have practical wisdom expressed through grunts and murmurs. Real Aussie chicks just giggle.
 

bomma_man

Member
Interesting words from Latham, thanks. As a country, we really dodged a bullet with him.

Related is this pretty great article from Alecia Simmonds earlier this year:

In contrast to France, where philosophers often grace the covers of Le Monde, and England where Slavoj Zizek writes regular columns in The Guardian Weekly. In Australia, we have Peter Hartcher on anti-Gillard autopilot and the bile-flecked bleating of shock-jocks like Alan Jones.

I think it's a bit disingenuous (to put it mildly) to suggest that the English media is some bastion of intellectual debate, they have just as much vile shit as us, it's just slightly offset by their two decent newspapers and a better funded public broadcaster. Our barren media environment is a product of being a small market and negligent regulation rather than some innate anti-intellectualism.
 

EatChildren

Currently polling second in Australia's federal election (first in the Gold Coast), this feral may one day be your Bogan King.
So how do we all plan to spend celebrating the first day of Tony Abbott as our new Prime Minister?
 

Window

Member
It's always funny to read clever international people looking at our economy, then at our politics, and back at our economy, and saying what the fuck. http://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/the-crisis-down-under

Pretty much exactly the point my economics professors (all of em mostly) remind us of again and again. One of them even took on the claim by Colin Barnett blaming rising electricity prices to the carbon tax as pretty much misleading.
 

elfinke

Member
So how do we all plan to spend celebrating the first day of Tony Abbott as our new Prime Minister?

It's not gonna happen, but if it does, handing in my citizenship and moving to NZ. #smashthestate

Oh, you said day after, which is Sunday. Well, packing my bags in preparation for moving to NZ I guess.
 

Dead Man

Member
I think it's a bit disingenuous (to put it mildly) to suggest that the English media is some bastion of intellectual debate, they have just as much vile shit as us, it's just slightly offset by their two decent newspapers and a better funded public broadcaster. Our barren media environment is a product of being a small market and negligent regulation rather than some innate anti-intellectualism.

It is a bit disingenuous, but the point is that they at least have good journalism and a good public broadcaster that is well funded to offset all the shite, we don't.

So how do we all plan to spend celebrating the first day of Tony Abbott as our new Prime Minister?

Drinking. Lots of it. Finding a new job (which will happen either way). :(

Edit: Should say new career. Going to be hard to be a social worker for refugees when they will either be in PNG or sent back home. Anyone know of any work going in Adelaide?
 

bomma_man

Member
It is a bit disingenuous, but the point is that they at least have good journalism and a good public broadcaster that is well funded to offset all the shite, we don't.

Of course, but the reasoning seems off (that's not to mention the writer's failure to acknowledge the good work that Radio National does). I'd be all for a TV tax a la the UK to fund the ABC and SBS. Actually - thinking out loud here - the only way to fix our horrible media climate through means other than new ownership laws or using anti-competition laws on Murdoch would be to fund a public newspaper. The ABC already has the digital equivalent, why not extend it? A man can dream.
 
I like Abbott's tactic: Say every word 3 times to pad out his answers. It's almost like you can see the gears slowly cranking as his speaks.
 

wonzo

Banned
It's funny Abbott brings up the "We can't afford it, it's too good!" line as some sort of valid rebuttal whenever someone criticises how unequal the PPL is and yet he says the exact same shit about the NBN.
 

hamchan

Member
Just started watching.


Abbott: This is just another tax on banks! Labor government just wants more money!

"So can you say that you won't be putting in this tax?"

Abbott: lol no. Still, it's a cash grab by Labor!!!
 

elfinke

Member
Twitter blew up over Abbott misfiring on his 'does this guy ever shut up?' line.

Both parties should be fucking ashamed over their respective asylum seeker policies. No moral high ground here you fickle mushheads.
 

elfinke

Member
Is this debate going to be archived somewhere or was it exclusive to sky?

It's on all the channels (7Two, ABC etc), so it's bound to be archived by atleast one of them. I'd check ABC 24 on iView tomorrow.

Won the toss and will bat, yahoo.
 

senahorse

Member
Much better than the first 'debate', Rudd handled himself very well and imo was a clear winner. In contrast Tony came across as erratic and frustrated, especially highlighted by the point when he butted in with "Does this bloke ever shutup". For a supposed Rhodes scholar he doesn't come across as very intelligent.
 

markot

Banned
Much better than the first 'debate', Rudd handled himself very well and imo was a clear winner. In contrast Tony came across as erratic and frustrated, especially highlighted by the point when he butted in with "Does this bloke ever shutup". For a supposed Rhodes scholar he doesn't come across as very intelligent.

He isnt smart. Academics dont prove shit. Plenty of 'smart' morons and plenty of 'dumb' smart people.
 

Omikron

Member
Much better than the first 'debate', Rudd handled himself very well and imo was a clear winner. In contrast Tony came across as erratic and frustrated, especially highlighted by the point when he butted in with "Does this bloke ever shutup". For a supposed Rhodes scholar he doesn't come across as very intelligent.
He clearly didn't have the answer and was after some get out.
 

wonzo

Banned
The NO Spin Zone @Meanz71
Fr gods sake how did a leftie journo frm #insiders get on @SkyNewsAust to comment on the #pplsforum ??? Go back to leftie world with Cassidy

lol

STOP THE LEFTIES
 

senahorse

Member
He isnt smart. Academics dont prove shit. Plenty of 'smart' morons and plenty of 'dumb' smart people.

Reading up on it, it appears he had a bit of help in getting that scholarship.

He clearly didn't have the answer and was after some get out.

Definitely not, he didn't have the answer to a lot of questions, typical for politicians but really glaring tonight.

I noticed that the first few front rows were made entirely of seniors and the younger people were seated at the back so Abbott got a louder applause every time.

Just saying, there was a very specific seating arrangement.

While I did get that impression at first, even the worm couldn't keep up the lie, the more Tony speaks the more people dislike him.
 

bomma_man

Member
Ugh the local Liberal ads are such shit.

2 million jobs!
Bigger economy!


No details.
Are cutting 12,000 public service jobs.

So... Confidence fairy or economy was strong under Howard therefore economy strong under Abbott.

What a fucking joke.
 
Pretty much every time I open YouTube I'm told to tell my refugee friends to tell their families about the freaking government's immigration policy.

Feels like the daily hate.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom