Philosophical Conversations Public Opinion Junk for code
parliament house.gif
Think Tanks
Oz Blogs
Economic Blogs
Foreign Policy Blogs
International Blogs
Media Blogs
South Australian Weblogs
Economic Resources
Environment Links
Political Resources
South Australian Links
"...public opinion deserves to be respected as well as despised" G.W.F. Hegel, 'Philosophy of Right'

a balance sheet of sorts « Previous | |Next »
May 31, 2008

The upside is that the final report of the 2020 Summit has been released. It is the result of public debate. The downside is the failure of the Rudd Government to address the anti-Muslim sentiments expressed at Camden over the Islamic school. Why so?

What we also have is the PM telling an disillusioned public service to worker even harder---long hours to meet increased job demands--- is what? At least it is a contradiction to the Rudd Government's rhetoric about balancing work and family and bringing fairness into the workplace as he expected them to work even harder.

Karen Middleton in in an op-ed in The Canberra Times says that:

Rudd has begun undermining his own arguments. He has always said he is governing for the ''long term''. But what is long-term about a short-term solution? And what about the flagship fight against climate change? Is that assisted by lowering the pump price of fossil fuels? It hardly encourages the search for or use of alternatives.

The upside is that the Rudd Government has moved to end discrimination against same-sex couples. New laws to overhaul superannuation rules for gays and lesbians have been introduced into the House of Representatives

On the upside five years a after the coalition invasion began, Australia's combat role in Iraq is over. Thank goodness That was a deceitful war. Support for withdrawal, or “cutting and running” as it used to be called, by the Coalition and its media cheerleaders, was deemed to be evidence of being soft on terrorism and anti-American.Now, the withdrawal – an implementation of ithe ALP's election commitmen---attracts only momentary attention.

The key question of whether petrol will be included in the Government’s emissions trading scheme is what will test the Rudd Government's courage. This was a government, remember, elected on a promise of real action on climate change

| Posted by Gary Sauer-Thompson at 11:26 PM | | Comments (8)


Are you suggesting that, after a pile of legislation that tries to stifle debate, another piece of legislation should be introduced to make it an offence to hold and express anit-Muslim views?

how about an option of a debate about these views?

I’m with you Gary. Can we also have a parallel debate about the arrival in Australia of other groups be they cultural, racial or religious. Let’s discuss the arrival in Australia of Spanish people, French people, Polynesian people, Peruvian people, and plenty of others. Let’s discuss the arrival in Australia of adherents to Hinduism, Buddhism, Sikhism, Juche, Judaism, Tenrikyo, Rastafarianism, Jainism, and other religions. It would appear that their arrival has been seamless.

Why is it Gary, that only one group is viewed as inimicitious? Why is that Gary?

White One Nation conservatism currently has a big problem with Muslim Australians.They are speaking up about it in relation to the Camden school. So why not have a debate about asimmilation and religion in secular multicultural Australia based on the remarks that have been made? What is wrong with a public debate?

The failure to do so indicates that the Rudd Government is complicit in these remarks.

'inimicitious (comparative more inimicitious, superlative most inimicitious)

1. (obsolete) Inimical; unfriendly, hostile.'

Gosh the internet is educational - I got to learn an obsolete adjective.

However, the suggestion in the comment in question that the arrival of all migrant groups apart from Muslims in Australia has been 'seamless' is laughable. The writer clearly has neither lived in Australia for very long nor learned much Australian history.

He might want to start with Lambing Flats, work his way through the White Australia policy, brush up on the history of Irish Australians, reflect on the experiences of wogs and dagoes in the 1950s, inform himself about Vietnamese boat people, survey those widely labelled 'spics' in the 1980s, and chat to a few of today's Sudanese migrants. Then perhaps he might realise how idiotic his comment is.

There are few things more pathetic than pompous ignorance expressed in rully big words.

"The failure to do so indicates that the Rudd Government is complicit in these remarks"

Or that the Rudd Government would prefer to conduct such a debate in relation to some aspect of immigration other than the Muslim folk devil. Personally I'm glad they haven't said anything after the Howard example on Cronulla.


You are being EXTREMELY naive if you think it is only "white One Nation conservatives" who have a problem with Muslims.

Try the Thais, Lebanese, English, Dutch, Danish, Swedish, Norwegian, Philipinnos, Indians, French, Spanish, Egyptians, Israelis, Balkans, Indonesians, Morrocco, Algeria, Sudan.

Just for starters.

I am referring to specific comments made at a specific event.