|
September 22, 2011
Some of the conservative commentators are becoming critical of the way the Liberals are conducting themselves. Paul Sheehan is an example. Principles matter he argues.
Paul Kelly is another. Kelly says that the impression Abbott leaves with his tougher and more humane stance on the asylum issue is that his real motive is to cripple Gillard in political terms-- he is more focused on sinking Gillard than stopping the boats.
It is good to see a bit of argy bargy happening within the ranks of conservatives. Normally they are into consensus---conform in how they think---not debate. Their partisan rhetoric is used to cover over the cracks within the ensemble of power --eg., social conservatives, neo-liberal free marketeers, war hawks, and the Christian right.
Update
It used to be just the neo-liberals stirring the pot on needing to make industrial relations more flexible (ie., the casualisation of labour, ) and to break the power of the unions. Bring back WorkChoices for the battlers is the cry. It's more choice and greater efficiency that is needed.
This is an indication of how neoliberalism will shrug off the challenge that the financial crisis presented. Whilst neo-liberalism appears to be about free markets, in practice the ideology is concerned with giant corporations' dominance over public life. This has been intensified, not checked, by the recent crisis and the acceptance that certain financial corporations are ‘too big to fail'.
|
I just don't get it!
Why does Abbott even bother to pretend to care about the humane treatment of asylum seekers? Surely nobody will fall for this transformation into a bleeding-heart. His hard-core supporters don't care, the rest of us don't trust his motives. And the corporate meeja don't have a f*&king clue.