January 31, 2025 • 56 mins
In this first New Politics podcast episode of 2025, we examine conservative calls to celebrate Australia Day (Invasion Day) despite widespread ambivalence, Sussan Ley’s bizarre comparison of the First Fleet to an Elon Musk Mars mission, and highlight Grace Tame’s “Fuck Murdoch” T-shirt controversy. We also look at the start of Donald Trump’s second term – marked by grandiose threats to seize the Panama Canal, claim Greenland, and renaming the Gulf of Mexico – as well as the Albanese government’s cautious response to Trump-like tactics from the Liberal and National parties. Finally, we discuss the fragile ceasefire between Israel and Hamas, questioning whether a sustainable peace is achievable amidst ongoing political strife, global struggles over narrative control, and human rights concerns.
Support New Politics, just $5 per month:
Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/newpolitics
Substack: https://newpolitics.substack.com
Song listing:
Support New Politics, just $5 per month:
Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/newpolitics
Substack: https://newpolitics.substack.com
Song listing:
- ‘Good Stuff’, The B-52s.
- ‘Let Me Entertain You’, Robbie Williams.
- ‘Off The Grid’, The Beastie Boys.
- ‘Humiliation’, The National.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
This episode of New Politics was released on the first
of February twenty twenty five and produced on the lands
of the Wongle and Gadigal people.
Speaker 2 (00:18):
Well, a big welcome to twenty twenty five. This is
our first episode for the year, and a big welcome
to you too.
Speaker 3 (00:24):
David, thanks to having me back. Idiot. It's been a
great break, but it's great to be back and getting
stuck into the things that we need to get stuck into.
Speaker 2 (00:34):
Oh, that's right. But also a lot has been happening
while we've been away. There's a new president in the
United States, has been a ceasefire in Gaza. There hasn't
been a ceasefire in those ongoing cultural wars in Australia.
We just had another battle on January the twenty sixth,
and we'll be discussing all of these issues pretty soon.
But it just goes to show that politics is just
(00:54):
like rust. It never sleeps. And there'll be a lot
more coming up in the lead up to the next
federal election.
Speaker 3 (01:00):
We're heading into I think what will be a very
busy time for both politicians and the people who analyze
and watch them. I think we'll find that the mainstream
press will try and keep things in the same planes
that they always keep them in as always. The interesting
stuff is the stuff that we maybe don't notice as
much but is there. And this is stuff that you
(01:22):
and I like to concentrate on.
Speaker 2 (01:25):
And just a reminder that New Politics is produced by
independent media. You can listen, in, share, subscribe and support
New Politics at Patreon and substack. It's just five dollars
per month, or you can donate directly at our website
at Newpolitics dot com dot you and of course all
of this is a good way to support independent journalism
(02:02):
which just started up another round of the Cultural Wars,
also known as Australia Day or Invasion Day, and the battle,
as usual, has been led by that five star General
of the Cultural Wars, Peter Dutton. Last year was a
battle over supermarkets not stocking Australia Day, thongs, towns and
stubby holders. This year it is a battle over people
being ashamed to celebrate Australia Day apparently, and now Peter
(02:25):
Dutton says that it's the Prime Minister Anthony Albanezi who
is creating all the division, even though it's Peter Dutton
who has been at the forefront of all of this.
But David, this happens each and every year. Peter Dunton
is just being like an authoritarian leader when he wants
to force people to smile and celebrate Australia Day. And
then there's this whipped up frenzy from the Conservatives about
(02:48):
supposedly respecting a day that just does not deserve this
level of respect in my opinion, and people should be
able to do whatever they want on this particular day. Personally,
I don't acknowledge Astraight Day at all. For me, it's
Invasion Day. But that's my choice, and no one is
stopping me from saying that or commemorating in that particular day,
(03:09):
and it's not stopping anyone else from celebrating Australia Day
if that's what they wish to do. But the day
after January the twenty sixth, it was almost like here today,
gone tomorrow. I don't think people care so much about
this day as they used to, and I don't think
that's going to stop Peter Dutton from waging this culture
war because he pretty much hasn't gone anything else to offer.
(03:32):
But this process probably isn't going to stop until the
next Federal election, I'd say.
Speaker 3 (03:38):
I think what happens is that people want to have
the day off. I think people want to acknowledge the
day in some kind of way. For a lot of people,
it's a time of acknowledging the good things that has
happened for many people who've lived here since seventeen eighty eight.
For other people, it's a time of grieving and mourn
(03:59):
of the loss the bad things that have happened. And
I think that Australia should be big enough as a
country that you can do both. One of the things
that we should do is look at changing the date.
I think that would just make it a bit easier. Well,
we can look at both sides, and I'm trying not
to both side the argument. And there are people who
(04:20):
fully acknowledge and agree with the arguments that it's invasion day,
that it's not a good day for our indigenous population,
but still wish to at least acknowledge the positive things
that have happened over the last two hundred years for
the population. And of course there'll be those Are you
saying that the two are irreconcilable. It's got to be
one or the other, and it should be whichever one
(04:42):
they prefer. Of course, I think Dutton uses it as
a way and the Right use it as a way
to cause division to keep in the paper. It's easy
to call Woolworth a woke organization, as they tried to
last year. Is like calling the National Party a group
of leftists. Just not a couple of actions done for
(05:03):
commercial reasons. The stuff wasn't selling, so why would they
stock It does not make you a woke organization.
Speaker 2 (05:11):
Oh I don't even know what this day means anymore.
It seems to be a day where the Conservatives are
the one who actually look forward to having this big
beat up about Western civilization, all this anti woke stuff. Now,
I personally, I just find it so predictable, it's unoriginal.
It's the same each and every year, and it just
ends up being pretty boring. And David, as you know,
(05:32):
we do have free speech in this country, and of
course this sort of debate and contention should be allowed,
but it's just ramped up out of all proportioned by
the likes of Peter Dunn for political purposes and by
Sky News. It's this confected outrage and just keeps pushing
this white authoritarian view of history which is exclusive and
(05:53):
just not historically correct. That's the other issue that I've
got with it as well. And this is what John
Howard used to do, this is what Tony Abbot used
to do, Scott Morrison. It's just this whitewashing of history
and then we get more conservative stupidity. We had the
case with Susan Lay announcing that the First Fleet in
seventeen eighty eight was like Elon Musk's mission to Mars,
(06:14):
and that the First Fleet didn't actually come out to
destroy or to pillage, even though that's exactly what they did,
and things like this coming from the Liberal Party. They're
not done by accident. These are carefully calibrated messages, designed
to upset and designed to get the intention. And then
he gets picked up and ramped up by the media.
(06:36):
He's the ABC deciding that it's best to ask the
Treasurer Jim Chalmers what he thinks about Susan Lay's comments.
Speaker 1 (06:43):
Susan Lee has compared the arrival of the First Fleet
with Elon Musk's efforts to build a colony on Mars.
The Prime Minister criticized her, what do you.
Speaker 4 (06:53):
Think is wrong with the comparison?
Speaker 5 (06:56):
Well, Honestly, if I focused my time and energy on
crazy that Susan Lee says, you know, I wouldn't get
anything else done. I think the maddest thing that Susan
Lee has said was when she was asked a year
ago this month whether the coalition would roll back Labour's
tax cuts for every taxpayer. She said that was absolutely
their position. And so I can't focus on mad stuff
(07:18):
that Susan Lee says from time to time life.
Speaker 3 (07:21):
Why do you think it's mad though?
Speaker 5 (07:22):
Well, it's mad because at a time when people are
under cost of living pressure, they've got a government, this
Labor government under Anthony Albanezi focused on the cost of
living and beating inflation, and they've got a coalition led
by Peter Dutton focused on conflict and culture wars. And
that's what this speech was all about. It was deliberately
written to try and provoke a response. I'm not going
to take the bait Susan Lee says crazy stuff all
(07:45):
of the time. I'm focused on the cost of living,
they're focused on culture wars. I'll keep doing my job
without obsessing over every kind of b grade speech that
Susan Lee gives.
Speaker 2 (07:57):
So all of this gets your attention valuable time by
talking about this rubbish and not the other more important issues.
And this is what this strategy is all about. Create
the outrage and waste everybody's time.
Speaker 3 (08:09):
That Suzanne Lay spoke in her church, fine, she absolutely
has that right. Probably she would see it as part
of her responsibilities as a local member, although I don't
know that. Well, no, i'll be fair. She might have
spoken in the local mosco or synagogue if they'd asked,
or temple. I won't go there, but certainly it didn't
seem to be a terribly newsworthy speech, and with an
(08:32):
embarrassing piece of historical analysis like that, that would have
been one that you might have put on your website
for a couple of days and quietly taken down. Instead,
it gets national coverage and is less quietly taken down
because once people realized just what a inept and inapt
comparison it was, it didn't last well. So it was
(08:55):
clearly Suzanne Lay trying to take advantage of a slow
news and try and take up some of the oxygen
that might have been taken up by say, lower inflation figures,
a rising jobs rate, things like that. Speculation that the
Reserve Bank might cut rates before May. It didn't really
(09:15):
work because it wasn't an idea that could sustain much
beyond all the two completely different things. And also Elon
Musk has blooded his copybook and is liked by fewer
and fewer people. So if the press wasn't so soft
towards the Liberal Party, it wouldn't have got to run
(09:35):
at all, except maybe in a derisive and humiliating way
for her.
Speaker 2 (09:40):
And there was also a different type of outrage, and
it wasn't about Willworths not selling Australia A T shirts
or thongs or anything like that, but it was about
another T shirt worn by Grace Tame to the Australian
of the Year reception at the Lodge in Canberra. And
the T shirt worn by Grace Tame had the words
fuck Murdoch on the front of them, and this created
(10:01):
more outrage for Sky News and the Australian newspaper. And
the Prime Minister didn't say anything at the time, but
the day after this is what he had to say.
Speaker 6 (10:11):
It was clearly designed to get attention. I don't intend
to add to that attention because I do think that
it takes away from what the day should be about,
which is the amazing people who were nominated as Australians
of the Year.
Speaker 2 (10:31):
And of course this was done to seek attention because
the Murdoch Empire has got a cancerous influence on not
just Australian politics, but politics in Britain and in the
United States and nothing is being done about it. And
maybe Anthony Alberenezi was upset about not getting his own
T shirt to wear around the lodge. But if his
(10:52):
government had implemented a Royal commission into the Murdoch Empire,
as was requested by over half a million people through
that petition organized by Kevin Rudd a few years ago,
well Grace Tame wouldn't have had to wear the T
shirt and we wouldn't be talking about it today.
Speaker 3 (11:09):
I thought it was appalling that she had such an
offensive word on the T shirt. I'd have felt a
lot easier if she'd blocked out the U so it
just had m asterix rdch But she wore what she wore,
so that's okay. Again. If we live in a country
the champions free speech, she had every right to use it.
(11:29):
Of Course, the free speech warriors only like free speech
when it agrees with them. If it doesn't agree with them,
then it's got to be suppressed, repressed, put down and
shut away. It was hardly surprising that Grace Tame, who
you might describe as a provocateur, and I don't mean
that in any disparaging way by the way others might.
I genuinely don't would wear something like that.
Speaker 2 (11:51):
Well, no, and Els wants to talk about this stuff,
so she decided to raise it as an issue exactly.
Speaker 3 (11:56):
And it is true that the Murdoch we suffered nine
years of an inept, corrupt, incompetent government featuring such people
as Joe Hockey, Scott Morrison, Angus Taylor, because the majority
owner of the press in Australia didn't really ever hold
them to account. Despite what they may argue, Tony Abbott
(12:17):
should have lost the prime ministership the minuity ran out
of parliament to try and stop a division, or tried
to run out of parliament and then was forced to vote,
yet went on to become Prime minister after he ate
the onion. Instead, we had to put up with him
for nearly two years. Malcolm Turnbull had to deal with
a completely feral cabinet because it suited Murdoch. Now, be fair,
(12:40):
I'm not sure that Turnbull would have been a great
prime minister or even a terribly good one, but his
views were more in line with centrist Australia than his
predecessor or his successor. And of course Scott Morrison the
most venal corrupt prime minister we ever had. And I
know that there's probably some of you out there saying, oh,
but what about elbow? Yeah, no, not even clothes. We
(13:03):
will be discussing Anthony Albernezi later, of course, but compared
to Morrison, he's Alfred Deacon or Golf whitlerm or Bob Menzies.
And that's not including the lives destroyed through other means,
the celebrity lives destroyed people like in the UK, where
there's a little bit more freedom to speak up Steve
(13:24):
Coogan and Hugh Grant, let alone, Harry and Megan who
withdrew their case, but only after a massive payment. And
there's legal glitch which meant that you either took the
massive amount of money on offer or you ended up
paying more even if you won, which is why some
people tried to say, oh you back down, he back down,
But in fact it makes no sense, but they got
(13:45):
a written apology and a attraction dating back to nineteen
ninety seven, so that while it mightn't have been everything
there after, that that was a huge thing over here.
Apart from a few like Grace Tame, we don't get
a lot of that level of criticism of the press
from people who have been affected. But I'll be fair,
Murdoch's tentacles run deep. And if you're trying to make
(14:08):
a living as an entertainer or commentator or what have
you annoying the person who owns eighty percent of the
outlets plus publishing, radio, et cetera, it's very difficult to
speak out. So you know, again another reason to say
good or you Grace team.
Speaker 2 (14:26):
So with all this Australia Day business like, I don't
know exactly what the best solutions are. This is the
outrace that comes out every single year. And I'm pretty
sure that if it wasn't about Australia Day, if Australia
Day was moved somewhere else, if it wasn't about Australia Day,
conservatives in the media would just find something else to
be outraged about. And David you suggested moving the day
(14:49):
of Australia Day to a different day. But historically Australia
did not exist on the twenty sixth of January in
seventeen eighty eight, that legal annexation was known as New
South Wales, and before that this land mass was understood
by Europeans to be New Holland, and the idea of
terror australis for Europeans well. It also included the land
(15:12):
mass of what is now known as Antarctica, and the
word Australia didn't become official until eighteen twenty four, and
it didn't exist as a country until January the first
nineteen I won when it was federated, and David, you
and I are creative people were always looking for creative solutions.
So perhaps we could have Australia Day on January the
(15:36):
first every year, which is technically, legally and historically correct,
and if people are worried about missing out on that
holiday towards the end of January, we'll have the last
Monday of January as the public holiday and you can
call it whatever you want on that day. So I
think that might be a meaningful solution for everyone.
Speaker 3 (15:55):
A few people have pointed out that January twenty six
has had other significances. The Australian Citizenship Law of forty
six was passed on the twenty sixth of January, meaning
that Australians could actually identify as Australians and not just
citizens of the British Commonwealth. It became a political and
national identity, not just a geographical one. The other one
(16:19):
there was a lovely meme going round which kind of
got it wrong a little bit. But the rum rebellion
the New South Wales started on the twenty sixth of
January in eighteen ten, which led to the brief overthrow
of the Bligh governorship and New South Wales being run
by shady corporates who were in it for money. Now
you might argue that in fact that was a very
(16:40):
successful coup that is still happening. But nonetheless it was
one of those things that Australians liked to think happened,
the plucky young locals overthrowing a corrupt system. Not quite,
but we could celebrate that. Still very New South Wales centric,
of course, I think May the first is a good day.
(17:01):
I think January first makes the most sense because the
Federation of Australia doesn't actually have any connotations. Oh, got
to be careful saying this because it doesn't improve things
for Indigenous people. But at least it wasn't further abrogation
of Indigenous rights and privileges and all of the things
that Indigenous people should have. So yeah, and then I'm
(17:24):
sure we can find something at the end of January. Unfortunately,
Elvis Presley's birthday is the eighth of January, so it's
maybe a bit soon. Well, I might get people to
work a bit quicker and you don't get the dead
Sydney and Melbourne month from Christmas Eve to Australia Day.
We go Christmas Eve to January eighth.
Speaker 2 (17:42):
Well, there are solutions out there if any people start
looking for them.
Speaker 3 (17:45):
Yeah. But for some reason, I know Andrew Bolt tried
to go viral with his claim that it should be
October nineteen, the day we voted no to the Voice,
and that died as it should have been offensive, racist
and justice stupid idea and didn't go anywhere. I think
there's a date in which we have the celebratory day
(18:06):
on first to January and then Sorry Day or some
such on the twenty sixth, where it's a day of
reflection and morning like Anzac Day should be.
Speaker 1 (18:20):
This is New Politics with Eddie Jokovic and David lewis
the best podcast on Australian politics and news commentary. You
can support us through Patreon and substack, and also find
us at Newpolitics dot com dot au.
Speaker 7 (19:08):
I gotta been sunbathing on the beach. You have never
seen a body so beautiful. Much better that, much better
than slippy Joel.
Speaker 2 (19:20):
Now usual warning to audience members who were triggered by
a certain President of the United States will be talking
about this guy for the next fifteen minutes or so,
so you can look away or point your ears in
a different direction for a little while. But Donald Trump
is the president of the United States and this is
his second term, and saying this in twenty twenty five
(19:42):
is as bizarre as when we first said it back
in twenty seventeen. And if people think that Susan Lay's
comments about the first Fleet and the visit to Mars
was bad enough, well that's nothing compared to Trump's first
week in office, where he threatened to take over the
Panama Canal, demanded to take Greenland from Denmark and if
(20:03):
they didn't, he'd consider that to be an active hostility
and officially changed the name of the Golf of Mexico,
which is the way there's been known since fifteen fifty
to the Gulf of America. And this was just the
first week, but this whole process will continue for the
next two hundred and seven weeks that he's going to
be in office. And all of this really is a
(20:26):
smoke screen for what's really going on. The United States
cannot take the Panama Canal. It's on Panamanian soil. And
although there was a Treaty for the Panama Canal Zone
where the US had control of the canal up until
nineteen seventy seven, that was a negotiated agreement, and what
Trump is proposing would be an act of war. And
the same with Greenland, that's been a part of Denmark
(20:48):
since eighteen fourteen and they've had self government since nineteen
seventy nine. But this is all part of the Mayhem,
as was Elon Musk's Nazi Saloon.
Speaker 4 (21:01):
You know, there are elections that the elections that come
and go. Some elections are you know, important, some or not.
But this one, this one, this one really matters. And
I just want to say thank you for making it happen.
Thank you, My heart goes out here. It is thanks
(21:30):
to you that the future of civilization is assured.
Speaker 2 (21:35):
These are all distractions, and in the background, Trump has
appointed some pretty corrupt people into government. He started to
wind back women's rights, he's winding back lgbt q I rights,
He's removing diversity, He's promoted the ethnic cleansing of Palestine.
And all of this is taking place at the moment
while everyone else is busy with all these questions about,
(21:56):
oh well, can Trump really take Greenland and Panama Canal?
Can he really do all of this? Or can he
not do this? Is Elon Musk really a Nazi or
is he a Mussolini supporter or is it just a
Roman salute? You know what's going on there. You know
these are all classics smoke screens, and it's going to
be mayhem. This has only been the first week, but
it's going to be mayhem. Corruption and incompetence on a
(22:17):
grand scale, just as it was in the first.
Speaker 3 (22:20):
Term, and worse, I think, because in the first term
they didn't quite know what they were doing. The second
term they know what they're doing, and they've got a
bit more control. In the House. What's going to thwart
him is state power. He's already lost some court cases
in key states based on who's allowed to live there,
(22:41):
for example, the Supreme courts on each side. But it
will be very difficult for the Supreme Court to uphold
some of the unconstitutional things that he has done. Birthright
citizenship thing, for example, completely trying to take off the
citizenship of people who were born here or sorry not
born here, born in the United States. I've been watching
(23:02):
and reading a lot on it, so the language has
infused me. I do apologize, dear listener who were born
in the United States, even if their parents weren't. And
of course it's nobody can really control where they're born.
And if your parents went over as undocumented people and
you were born there, you're in the States. And that's true.
If your parents were there on holidays for six weeks.
(23:24):
Why you'd book a holiday six weeks before you were
having a baby, I don't know, but it happens. Or
if you were born on an American ship, for example,
your parents may be full German citizens. Germany has a
slightly different citizenship. If your parents are German, then your German.
It's a bit like the British one. It's not about
where you were born, it's about who your parents were written.
(23:45):
It's the same Australia, I think, is the same for America.
To change that would be to overturn a whole lot
of precedents that will be very problematic for it to maintain.
And while we're looking at people who weren't there fully legally.
Elon Musku was an illegal immigrant Milania. Trump was really
(24:05):
an illegal immigrant brought over. And so it's one of
those things that as they go through into churches and
schools and workplaces, places where you'd expect to be safe
and take people. He's talking about in closing them all
on Guantanamo Bay, where they'll be concentrated in one area.
Now hold a second, where have I heard this before?
Speaker 2 (24:27):
It's okay, you can say we've heard it all before
back in Nazi Germany pretty much.
Speaker 3 (24:31):
I was going to say, back in South Africa with
the British and the Boors. But same thing. They're looking
at concentration camp. Whether that will lead to the outcome
of the German concentration camps remains to be seen, but
it's not a good look.
Speaker 2 (24:46):
And for me, United States politics is a bit of
a joke even when the Democrats are in office, and
I think it will be more of a joke over
the next four years. But it's not a joke for
the rest of the world. The US is still the
most powerful and most influential country in the world. Now
it might not be for too much longer with the
rise of China, but my feeling is that it's going
(25:08):
to become a lot more extreme the entire country. And
Trump has changed the process of modern politics. That idea
of the idiot king, the noise and the mayhem and
the outright idiocy that all seems to get the rewards
in modern day politics. And of course we've seen all
of this before. We saw it with Mussolini in Italy,
we saw it with Hitler and Germany. We're seen in
(25:29):
quite a few countries well throughout history, all across the world,
and it's always a big show that has disastrous consequences
for not just the country, but for the entire world.
And I think we also have to think about what
all of this means for Australia and for that alliance
with the United States, and I think it gives us
an opportunity to start forging creative alliances elsewhere, and that
(25:54):
doesn't mean giving up on the United States. But over
the next twenty years or so, I think stronger alliances
and relationships have to be formed with other countries, with China,
with Indonesia, with India reassessing the Orcas arrangement, which is
purely in the interests of the United States and Britain.
It's definitely not an Australia's interests. And I think if
(26:16):
Australia did have a stronger and better alliance with China,
I'm not saying that it's terrible. At the moment. It
has been patched up by the alban Easy government and
China is already Australia's biggest trading partner by far. If
you had a much stronger and better alliance with China,
well you wouldn't need to buy all of those nuclear
submarines under the Orcas agreement, which we're not probably not
(26:39):
going to get.
Speaker 3 (26:39):
Anyway, no exactly. I mean they've already admitted there's no
submarines coming, not even in thirty years.
Speaker 2 (26:47):
I think there's a couple of tanks coming away in
a few little boats.
Speaker 3 (26:50):
Oh thank goodness, that'll keep them out. Three tanks and
two boots. And again we've had trade dealings with Indonesia
for one hundred and fifty years, probably more if you
include indigenous trade with Indonesia. Papua New Guinea is closer
to the Australian mainland than Tasmania is, and that's important
to remember. It's a quick hop on a canoe, a
(27:12):
couple of hours on the canoe, and you're really on
what is now modern Indonesia or parts of it Arian
Jaya and things like that. But since white settlement we've
traded with China, Japan and now Korea, Indonesia, Cambodia and happily.
And the Keating idea that the far East to them
(27:32):
is the near North to us remains very true. And
having good relationships and they won't always be harmonious relationships.
We clash with New Zealand all the time, which is
culturally not identical but very close to Australia, doesn't mean
we're going to war with them, doesn't mean that we're
not going to stop trading with New Zealand. It doesn't
(27:52):
mean that New Zealand stops being an extremely important neighbor
and ally and friend. It just means that kind tries
have to look after their own self interest and it's
the same if we were able to do that with India.
I didn't quite dig into it because I'm not a
sports watcher, but there was some talk about the number
of Indian people at the cricket in Melbourne and how
(28:14):
many of them were local, and this is great. I mean,
if you want people, it doesn't matter where what background
do you have. If you're buying a ticket, surely the
cricket people would be happy, and I'm sure the cricket
people were happy that they got sold out tickets. But
there was a little bit of oh why are there
so many Indians here in that subtext way that the
mainstream press can do. But a very important country to
(28:37):
Australian multiculturalism and Australian culture, as is China. We've had
Chinese immigration here since at least eighteen thirty. There are
families who are of Chinese descent who have been here
for longer than a lot of people of Anglo descent.
The big Celtic wave only happens in the famine with
the gold rushers and things in the eighteen fifties. That's
(28:59):
when a lot of Chinese immigrants come out too, and
so we have that We've had very good relations with
Japan since the nineteen fifties, with the cars, with the televisions,
with all the other stuff we brought from Japan, which
we're now buying really from China and Indonesia to try
and prop up a very western centric or very euro
(29:23):
centric and I'm using European very broadly here, meaning also
the United States seems to me to be a bit shortsighted.
Not to say, as you rightly said, we don't have
to get rid of them, and they don't stop being
important to us, but Australian national interest has to move
away from being essentially the lap dog and being a firm,
(29:44):
strong member of the international community who is as friends
to as many people as it's possible to be friends with.
Speaker 2 (30:04):
And we can also see that the Liberal Party is
now pretty much copying what the Trump administration is doing,
even though the ABC published an article during the week
claiming that Peter Dunton isn't going to use the Trump
playbook in the lead up to the next federal election. Now,
I'm not sure where the ABC has been over the
past year, but that's exactly what Peter Dunton has been doing.
(30:25):
He hasn't been dancing along to the village people, but
pretty much everything else he's been doing is straight from
the Trump playbook.
Speaker 3 (30:33):
And you'll have to excuse me, Eddie, I've got to
get some bleach to wipe that image out of my eyes.
Speaker 2 (30:38):
I'll pass it over to you. And during the week,
Peter Dunton announced Just Center Price as the spokesperson for
Government Efficiency and that's an exact replica of Trump's Department
of Government Efficiency. Well, it's using exactly the same words.
And I think just Center Price might need to look
at her own wasteful expenditure if she wants to be
(30:59):
serious about this. He spent seventy six thousand dollars on
business class flights during the Voice of Parliament referendum in
twenty oh three, spent twenty one thousand dollars on a
flight to attend a Cost of Living committee meeting. She
could also look at Peter Dutton's twenty three thousand dollar
flight to a GENA Reinhart conference, or when he spent
(31:19):
sixty three thousand dollars for himself and his staff members
to fly to another cost of living meeting. There was
also six thousand dollars to attend another Gina Reinhart party,
and then when Jacinder Price has finished up there, she
could actually have a look at all the wasteful routs,
car park routs and corruption instigated by the Liberal Party
(31:39):
when they were in office. So there might actually be
quite a lot of work for her to do here.
But I just thought that the world had had enough
of this Trumpet behavior. I thought that we had enough
of the first term of Donald Trump. Boris Johnson in
the UK, Scott Morrison here, and I thought that this
might just be the end of it all. But it's
also part actually in response to their replacements just being
(32:03):
so underwhelming Joe Biden in the United States and is
follow up Kamala Harris, Kiir Starmer in the UK, Anthony
Albanezy here. And I don't think that they've been bad leaders,
and they've just done what they have to do as
far as the work of government is concerned, but they've
just been so poor politically, and it's almost like they've
(32:23):
created a pathway for these nut jobs to return to office.
And I'm just wondering what can Centerish parties do. And
I'm not going to call them left a center because
they're just not. But all of these convenient idiots like Trump,
Boris Johnson, Scott Morrison, they always present themselves as outsiders,
but they're not. They're all on the right and they're
(32:45):
a solid part of establishment as well. And they just
open up the gates for billionaires and corrupt business people
to get into government I don't mean as members of government,
but to actually influence and they have strong roles within
government itself or whatever you want to call them. I
just don't think that they've worked out a way of
dealing with all of this. Anthony Albeneasy promise change, but
(33:06):
it's been a slow incremental change, you know, as far
as I'm concerned. They've actually been good government, but the
politics has just been absolutely hopeless. And Peter Darton is
just this mindless populace and just says whatever he needs
to say. He's modeling himself exactly on Donald Trump, except
for the village people, of course. But this is what
seems to work in modern day politics, and the right
(33:29):
and the extreme right is just winning out on this level.
Speaker 3 (33:33):
The left made a crucial mistake, I think, and this
goes back to Tony Blair and Clinton Bob Hawk, Paul keating.
We can point to the many, many good things that
those men did, but they took it as read that
the economy couldn't be reformed to a fairer way than neoliberalism,
which is one of the most unfair ways. And we
(33:54):
have people like Jim Chalmers who speak eloquently and deeply
own economic reform, but are prevented from really doing the
major economic reform that is needed to get us out
of this neoliberal con and it is a con. Private
health insurance, what's that It provides nothing, It does nothing.
(34:15):
It just shuffles money from the patient to the health
provider without actually providing any value. Private education in Australia,
it's the same curriculum, it's the same pool it teaches,
it's the same as anywhere else. It provides nothing of
any value, certainly not with some of the elite schools anyway.
(34:36):
The massive fees involve private law enforcement. It's just something
that I can't even begin to And even down to
private media seems to be failing. If it's run fairly
and does a good job, okay, do it. But private
mainstream media where the ABC is cowed by what's happening
(34:57):
outside it. It's editors and journalists don't want to close
off their options for jobs outside the industry or outside
the ABC private infrastructure. Why did the government pay far
more for a private firm to build the road so
they can then profit, then just build the road themselves.
The left has to really take a stand. I think
(35:17):
centrism has died. It stood for nothing, so fell for
everything and has fallen on.
Speaker 2 (35:23):
My point is also that even if the left or
center left, whatever you want to call them, if they
were doing all those good things that were opposed to
neo liberalism, they probably wouldn't get much credit for it.
Speaker 3 (35:34):
And oh they wouldn't.
Speaker 2 (35:35):
It's the populace that are winning out because they do
all of these populous man crazy things like dancing to
the village people. And Jim Chalmers is actually a fan
of the Beastie Boys. Maybe he should start dancing along
to the Beastie Boys when he starts doing his press conferences.
Or maybe Anthony Orbheneaz he should put on some midnight
oil or radio Birdman or something like that. Just do
something different to jack it up a little bit.
Speaker 3 (35:57):
Fight for your right to cut interest rates.
Speaker 2 (35:59):
Or whatever the cases I'm being a little bit facetious,
but I'm just trying to work out, well, why are
the populace and their right wing and their extremist right wing,
why are they winning out on these sort of battles
when they've absolutely got nothing to offer and they do
the opposite of good government.
Speaker 3 (36:14):
Yeah, it's there's a timidity in the left and instead
of standing up like the great leftist reformers did, and
let's be faur the great rightst reformers stood up. Margaret
Thatcher was a terrible PM, but you knew pretty much
where she stood. John Howard was a terrible PM, but
you knew pretty much exactly where he stood. We need
(36:36):
our leftist leaders to stand up and shows where they are,
and it means that they lose votes. Then they lose votes.
It's better to die for something than to fall for anything.
And it's you know, Peter Garrett, it's better to die
on your feet than live on your knees. I know
you didn't say that originally, but while we're quoting songs,
(36:57):
the vested interests have to be cleaned out of Parliament.
I think we should go back to publicly funded elections
with a cap on spending, you get so much everybody
gets approximately the same amount. You're not allowed to take
private donations. It's harder to do this, but you get
rid of somehow. And this is where I'll have to
hand it over to our listeners with ideas. You have
(37:19):
to get rid of those lobbyists who damage I'm actually
all four lobbyists, believe it or not, in that I
have something that I believe is right and I go
in and lobby my local member, the minister, the parliament whomever.
I have no problem with that in principle.
Speaker 2 (37:35):
Well, a cos is a lobbyist.
Speaker 3 (37:37):
Yeah, exactly when people say, oh, we've got to get
rid of lobbyists. So I don't know that I want
to get rid of acos. I don't want to know,
want to get rid of the various housing lobbies and
disable people's lobbies. But we have to get rid of
money as a political tool. Ban private donations, and people say, oh,
can't we cap them? But what happens is that we
caap them at say one hundred dollars a year, and
(37:58):
then suddenly you get three million, one hundred dollars donations from.
Speaker 2 (38:02):
Two people, well indirectly from two people, but that's.
Speaker 3 (38:06):
Directly from two people. We have to think about how
to fix this. Having compulsory voting is great, although they
still try it here. The apathy that both parties are
the same. What's the point I live in a safe seat,
What's the point I live in a swinging seat. It'll
go to the person that I want to vote to.
What's the point? But it does tend to take the
(38:26):
edge off that a bit. In Britain, of course, the
Conservative bus used to take all the Labor voters down,
and the Labor bus used to take all the Conservative
voters down just because the other side wanted to use
the resources of the other side. But we don't need
any of that. Australia has a really great voting model. Yes,
and as we've said in our book, it needs some reform,
(38:47):
but the bones are there to make it one of
the leading democracies in the world, yet there's no will
to do this. Of course, a lot of these reforms
will probably see the party who bring them in kicked out.
But again it's better to go on my Peking principle
changes than to hang around for years and do nothing.
Speaker 1 (39:09):
This is New Politics. Available through Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Amazon,
audible and YouTube, and also available to support it Patreon,
substack and at our website New politics dot com dot au.
Speaker 2 (39:52):
There's been a sea spart deal between Israel and Hummas
and it's already been running for about two weeks. Despite
Israel continuing to kill people within Palestine and southern Lebanon,
the ceasefire is still holding and there will be three
stages to the ceasefire. The first stage was to allow
for a hostage exchange, and we have to remember that
(40:12):
Israel has been keeping Palestinian hostages for many, many years.
The other part is that the Israeli defense forces will
leave Palestinian cities and the larger towns. There'll been influx
of aid and a return of displaced Palestinians, which is
what's been happening over the past couple of days. Stage
two commences next week and there'll be more hostage exchanges.
(40:35):
Israel to make a complete withdrawal from Gaza and a
permanent ceasefire, and then Stage three will see the return
of bodies of hostages who have died and the reconstruction
of Gaza will commence, which will probably take decades to complete. Now,
the state of Israel hasn't achieved any of its objectives.
(40:55):
It's killed at least forty five thousand Palestinians, possibly up
to two hundred thousand. It's accepted a ceasefi idea that
was actually on offer in May twenty twenty four and
it rejected at the time. The government of Benjamin Netnaho
has corroded so much that it's almost on the verge
of collapse. The war has cost Israel billions and billions
(41:17):
of dollars, and its economy is also on the verge
of collapse. Now Netanya, who specifically said that the aim
was to wipe out Hamas and Hummas, is still there.
It's probably even stronger than it was before Israel started
this war. The war has been a complete waste of time,
like most wars are, and in my opinion, Israel has
(41:38):
lost this process. Even though it inflicted most of the
pain on Palestine through death and destruction and wiping out
about eighty percent of all the infrastructure, schools, and hospitals.
Speaker 3 (41:48):
It's been so upsetting. As bad as that October seven
attack was, and it was, it didn't justify what has happened.
The only Hummas leader they've court with the person they
had in charge of negotiating the peace deal. They killed him.
They've finally negotiated a peace and I think that's because
most of the world has realized just how bad the
(42:12):
Israeli government is, and net Nyahu realized that something had
to be done. The ceasefire is a good thing. It
should have happened months ago, and ideally we shouldn't have
needed a ceasefire, but we're dealing with quite untrustworthy people,
and anything can happen. I don't think we're on the
road to a lasting peace in Gaza just yet.
Speaker 2 (42:34):
Oh that's try. But a ceasefire always has to be welcomed.
Anything that stops people from dying, well, of course that
has to be welcomed. But it's never going to be
a permanent ceasefire unless there is a just, of course resolution,
and there's nothing that suggests that that's going to be
the case. And you know, I'm just left wondering how
that would ever arise. So the United States President has
(42:56):
proposed shifting Palestinians to Jordan and Egypt, and guess what,
that's exactly what happened in nineteen forty six with the Knakbar.
It's also known as ethnic cleansing, and President Trump should
know that that is a bad thing, but he doesn't.
And a better solution, as far as I'm concerned, would
be to clear out the Israeli settlers from West Bank
and for Israel to completely remove itself from Gaza and
(43:19):
the West Bank and then start looking at southern Lebanon,
Golan Heights and a lot of the other areas. And
this will still take many years to resolve if it
ever does happen. And maybe if we see collapse of
the Netanyahu government or for Benjamin net Yahoo to be
removed from israel politics, that might be a start, although
(43:41):
there's probably always going to be another right wing extremist
available to replace Benjamin Nen Yahoo. But I just think
that Israeli society needs to fundamentally change, as well as
well as the unchallenged support for the state of Israel
among Western leaders. But I just feel that we might
be waiting for a long time before that happens.
Speaker 3 (44:01):
We've got quite a lot of factors, not least the
fact that the Netanyahu and a lot of his cabinet
are doing their very best to stay out of jail
while they're in power. It's harder to put them into jail.
You've got all that oil and gas in the Bay,
and that's really what this is all about, getting access
(44:22):
to that. In a sense, it's just nineteen nineteen all
over again and Lawrence of Arabia and all of that
bigger powers going in and you've got the three or four,
you've got America. I think you still have British interests
trying to hold on as best as they can. Now
they don't have the EU. You've got Russia trying to
get hold of this stuff. So Putin, who is a
(44:45):
sereal disruptor, is doing his best as well. And I
think one of the figures that we have to keep
a closer eye on is Vladimir Putin. Access to that
those resources is a huge thing. Also, it's a good
central spot to have a safe space for your military
to be based, and so the United States I think
(45:06):
we'd love to have a couple of bases in Palestine
near the Bay there, just so they can get to
places a bit more quickly than they can. I don't
think that's a good idea, but I think that's what
they're after.
Speaker 2 (45:18):
And that's what's happening geopolitically within the area, and a
lot of people still ask us, well, what's all of
this got to do with Australia, And it's actually got
a lot to do with Australia, not directly, but indirectly
and locally. Israel politics plays out in so many different ways.
Peter Dutton has just continued his attacks from last year,
and as we've mentioned quite a few times before, he's
(45:40):
always looking for an opportunity to create division and this
just gives him another opportunity. Now he's claiming that the
government has done very little to stop anti Semitism in Australia,
without suggesting what else they could do that's any different
to what they're doing at the moment. He said that
Foreign Minister Senator Penny Wong shouldn't have gone to the
Auschwitz Memorial to commemorate eighty years since the end of
(46:04):
the Holocaust, made a big deal about that, and this
all feeds into right wing sentiments in Australia. And it's
not just Peter Dutton who's been politicizing anti Semitism. It's
the Zionist lobby in Australia, who, in my opinion, have
got far too much influence in this country and they've
been attacking anyone who disagrees with them, including other members
(46:27):
of the Jewish community. They've attacked the journalist Anthony Lowenstein,
calling him a self loathing Jew. They've attacked the CEO
of the Moderate Jewish Council of Australia, Sarah Schwartz, and
then the attacks are all continued by Sky News. Sarah
Schwartz responding to Peter Dutton and News corporation and their
politicization of anti Semitism.
Speaker 8 (46:50):
So, I gave a speech at an anti racism conference
and my speech was about how Peter Duttan and the
Coalition and far eight actors around the world are exploiting
the Jewish community and the rise in anti Semitism to
fuel division and hatred towards other racialized groups. And I
think that this incident speaks exactly to why that message
(47:11):
is so important. Already we have seen Peter Dudden, you know,
throw point fingers, and Anthony Albanesi suggests security measures when
we have absolutely no knowledge about the ideological motives of
what is happening here. So I think, I think, you know,
the Murdoch Press and the Coalition have a very big
incentive to exploit you know what I said in my speech.
(47:31):
But the fact that they have chosen this week, rather
than actually addressing a rise in anti Semitism, to go
after me for making a point that they are using
the Jewish community as political footballs, I think speaks volumes
to the way that these people treat Jews and anti Semitism.
And you know, they really have not shown that they
have an interest in actually addressing these really real rises
(47:54):
in anti Semitism, and they are confecting outrage and that
is making Jewish people more scared. They need to get
real and actually stop using our community as political footballs.
Speaker 2 (48:05):
I think that these are the people who have done
their best to whip up the anti Semitism in Australia,
the Zionus Lobby and Peter Dutton, And that does not
condone at all any of the fire bombing attacks or
Nazi graffiti that's occurred in the eastern suburbs of Sydney
or parts of Melbourne, even though there have been suggestions
from the Australian Federal Police that there are foreign entities
(48:27):
and foreign actors involved here, and who knows that might
even include Mussad. But if they all just shut up
and stop politicizing Israel and Gaza for their own base purposes.
A lot of this might not be actually happening.
Speaker 3 (48:40):
You're right, the criticism that the Labor government isn't pro
Israel enough. Again, what is in Australia's national interest, Surely
supporting its own citizens, Surely keeping out of another Middle
Eastern conflict that has very little effect on us except militarily,
because we get involved for no reason. It's been happening
(49:00):
since Gallipoli and it never ends well. I've noticed that
the anti Semitic attacks, the New South Wales police have
come out and said one of them seems to be
in a setup, that it wasn't quite what it seemed,
that there was too much suspicious behavior around it to
suggest that it was a genuine attack against Jewish people,
which should be condemned. By the way people attacking Jewish
(49:23):
people should be condemned, people attacking Middle Eastern people should
be condemned, people attacking Asian should be condemned, people attacking
Anglos should be condemned, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera.
Seems to be the actions of a group who have
ever played their hand, have lost control and are trying
to fix things by doubling down. Penny Wong, whose public
(49:44):
words have been in favor of Israel defending itself copyright trademark,
has been called a very unenthusiastic supporter of Israel. Well, one,
she's the Australian Foreign Minister, so that's got nothing to
do with anything whether she supports Israel or doesn't support
his rale, provided, of course she's not anti Jewish in
(50:06):
this you can love a country and not support its government.
I'm looking at you United States, I'm looking at you
Australia under the Liberal Party, the language used to try
and normalize abhorrent behavior. She didn't support the genocide. He
made some mild words of rebuke against us. She must
(50:27):
be anti Semitic, despite all evidence to the contrary. Jeremy Corbyn,
who had stood up all his career against anti Semitism,
was claimed to be anti Semitic. The Labor Party finally
admitted that they made that up so he wouldn't be
leader of the Labor Party, and that has cost them
very dearly. One it led us to Boris Johnson as
(50:47):
Prime Minister, and two Labor is now floundering in office
because it can't really differentiate itself from the Conservative Party.
Speaker 2 (50:56):
What's also the situation for what is the Labor government
mean to do in this situation? And we're being critical
of the Prime Minister for he almost one hundred percent
support for the State of Israel and almost totally indifference
to the plight of Palestinians. But I think the biggest
problem for him with all of this is political. Now
setting aside the morality of being totally indifferent to the
(51:18):
clear and obvious attempts of genocide and gata, and I
know that's a hard one to ignore, but we'll just
set that aside for the time being. But just politically,
Anthony Albanese is in nowhere land on this issue. And
I think that the lesson in Australia is that unless
a political leader is two hundred percent behind Israel, they
(51:38):
will suffer politically. And because Albanzi has only been ninety
nine point nine percent in his support of the state
of Israel, he's suffered politically. You know that zero point
one percent where he hasn't supported the state of Israel. Well,
that's open up this avenue for the Zionus lobby and
Peter Dutton to attack him politically. And because of this,
(52:00):
he doesn't look strong. He's been made to look weak.
This week he's announced two Holocaust education centers in Perth
and Canberra. Now, before I get accused of anti semitism,
I'm not saying that this is a bad thing. But
where's the education centers about Islamophobia in Australia or a
museum about the history of the neckbar from nineteen forty six? Well,
(52:21):
there isn't one in Australia. And because there is now
a cease firing in place in Gaza, and if this continues,
well it might be less of an issue by the
time of the next federal election in Australia. But even
if the issue itself isn't a factor of the next election,
and to be honest, it probably won't be at all.
(52:42):
And also, the people who have decided that they're not
going to vote for the Labor Party at the next
election because of their position on Gaza, well I don't
think they're likely to preference the Liberal Party above the
Labor Party about this unless they do it as a
process vote. But I think all of this is more
about how managing this issue is reflected in the leadership
(53:04):
of the Prime Minister. And if the electorate sensors weakness
in a leader, and if they don't know anything at
all about the issue that they're being weak in, I
think that that spills over to other areas and the
electorate might be thinking, well, if they're weak on that issue,
what else are they being weak on? And I suppose
that generally the electorate does focus on the matters related
(53:26):
to the economy when it comes to election time. But
I'd say that Anthony Albernezi will just be hoping that
the issue of Gaza just goes away for the next
five or six months and that the issue doesn't crop
up during the election to remind people of that weakness.
Speaker 3 (53:42):
People will notice weakness and lack before they notice positive stuff,
and I'm sure many of you have had that experience.
You know, you've done a really great job on something
and someone will walk in and say, oh, you missed
a bit, for example, And you can magnify that in
government because you have approximately half the population against what
(54:05):
you're doing anyway, And then on your side there'll be
people who don't think you've gone far enough or done enough,
or wouldn't have done it that way. It's easy to criticize,
hard to do. That's why we're in the criticizing business.
Doing nothing will cost you far more politically than standing up.
I said this earlier, but again it's absolutely true. You
(54:27):
will at least get the acknowledgment of your enemies that
you tried to do something, and you might even swing
a few of the waiver its, and your supporters will
find it hard to find that stuff to criticize. Being
timid in the face of bullying is never a good look,
especially if you're the leader of the twelfth biggest economy
(54:48):
in the world and trying to be original superpower. To
be cowed by vested interests, to be suppressed by vested
interests doesn't bode well politically, and the preference flows will
swing towards labor. But it only takes a handful of
seats where you don't get enough of a preference flow
when it goes to a strong independence or Greens or
(55:09):
and you're out of government. Now again, I don't think
this is necessarily a bad thing, But if I was
in government and some of the stuff they've started to
do is starting to coalesce into something good and coaless
into long term positive reform, I'd want to be trying
to hold onto government so that the next term, in
which it seems they've planned a lot for, isn't bogged
down by endless negotiations by recalcitrant independence or opposition parties.
Speaker 2 (55:40):
That's it for this episode of New Politics. Thanks for
listening in, and if you'd like to support our style
of journalism and commentary, please make your donation at our
website at newpolitics dot com dot au. We don't beg, plead,
beseech or gaslight you about journalism coming to an end.
We just keep it very simple. If you like what
we do, please send some support our way. It keeps
(56:01):
our commitment to independent journalism ticking along. I'm Eddie Jokovic.
Thanks for listening in, and it's goodbye to our listeners.
Speaker 3 (56:08):
I'm David Lewis. We'll see you next time.
This episode of New Politics was released on the first
of February twenty twenty five and produced on the lands
of the Wongle and Gadigal people.
Speaker 2 (00:18):
Well, a big welcome to twenty twenty five. This is
our first episode for the year, and a big welcome
to you too.
Speaker 3 (00:24):
David, thanks to having me back. Idiot. It's been a
great break, but it's great to be back and getting
stuck into the things that we need to get stuck into.
Speaker 2 (00:34):
Oh, that's right. But also a lot has been happening
while we've been away. There's a new president in the
United States, has been a ceasefire in Gaza. There hasn't
been a ceasefire in those ongoing cultural wars in Australia.
We just had another battle on January the twenty sixth,
and we'll be discussing all of these issues pretty soon.
But it just goes to show that politics is just
(00:54):
like rust. It never sleeps. And there'll be a lot
more coming up in the lead up to the next
federal election.
Speaker 3 (01:00):
We're heading into I think what will be a very
busy time for both politicians and the people who analyze
and watch them. I think we'll find that the mainstream
press will try and keep things in the same planes
that they always keep them in as always. The interesting
stuff is the stuff that we maybe don't notice as
much but is there. And this is stuff that you
(01:22):
and I like to concentrate on.
Speaker 2 (01:25):
And just a reminder that New Politics is produced by
independent media. You can listen, in, share, subscribe and support
New Politics at Patreon and substack. It's just five dollars
per month, or you can donate directly at our website
at Newpolitics dot com dot you and of course all
of this is a good way to support independent journalism
(02:02):
which just started up another round of the Cultural Wars,
also known as Australia Day or Invasion Day, and the battle,
as usual, has been led by that five star General
of the Cultural Wars, Peter Dutton. Last year was a
battle over supermarkets not stocking Australia Day, thongs, towns and
stubby holders. This year it is a battle over people
being ashamed to celebrate Australia Day apparently, and now Peter
(02:25):
Dutton says that it's the Prime Minister Anthony Albanezi who
is creating all the division, even though it's Peter Dutton
who has been at the forefront of all of this.
But David, this happens each and every year. Peter Dunton
is just being like an authoritarian leader when he wants
to force people to smile and celebrate Australia Day. And
then there's this whipped up frenzy from the Conservatives about
(02:48):
supposedly respecting a day that just does not deserve this
level of respect in my opinion, and people should be
able to do whatever they want on this particular day. Personally,
I don't acknowledge Astraight Day at all. For me, it's
Invasion Day. But that's my choice, and no one is
stopping me from saying that or commemorating in that particular day,
(03:09):
and it's not stopping anyone else from celebrating Australia Day
if that's what they wish to do. But the day
after January the twenty sixth, it was almost like here today,
gone tomorrow. I don't think people care so much about
this day as they used to, and I don't think
that's going to stop Peter Dutton from waging this culture
war because he pretty much hasn't gone anything else to offer.
(03:32):
But this process probably isn't going to stop until the
next Federal election, I'd say.
Speaker 3 (03:38):
I think what happens is that people want to have
the day off. I think people want to acknowledge the
day in some kind of way. For a lot of people,
it's a time of acknowledging the good things that has
happened for many people who've lived here since seventeen eighty eight.
For other people, it's a time of grieving and mourn
(03:59):
of the loss the bad things that have happened. And
I think that Australia should be big enough as a
country that you can do both. One of the things
that we should do is look at changing the date.
I think that would just make it a bit easier. Well,
we can look at both sides, and I'm trying not
to both side the argument. And there are people who
(04:20):
fully acknowledge and agree with the arguments that it's invasion day,
that it's not a good day for our indigenous population,
but still wish to at least acknowledge the positive things
that have happened over the last two hundred years for
the population. And of course there'll be those Are you
saying that the two are irreconcilable. It's got to be
one or the other, and it should be whichever one
(04:42):
they prefer. Of course, I think Dutton uses it as
a way and the Right use it as a way
to cause division to keep in the paper. It's easy
to call Woolworth a woke organization, as they tried to
last year. Is like calling the National Party a group
of leftists. Just not a couple of actions done for
(05:03):
commercial reasons. The stuff wasn't selling, so why would they
stock It does not make you a woke organization.
Speaker 2 (05:11):
Oh I don't even know what this day means anymore.
It seems to be a day where the Conservatives are
the one who actually look forward to having this big
beat up about Western civilization, all this anti woke stuff. Now,
I personally, I just find it so predictable, it's unoriginal.
It's the same each and every year, and it just
ends up being pretty boring. And David, as you know,
(05:32):
we do have free speech in this country, and of
course this sort of debate and contention should be allowed,
but it's just ramped up out of all proportioned by
the likes of Peter Dunn for political purposes and by
Sky News. It's this confected outrage and just keeps pushing
this white authoritarian view of history which is exclusive and
(05:53):
just not historically correct. That's the other issue that I've
got with it as well. And this is what John
Howard used to do, this is what Tony Abbot used
to do, Scott Morrison. It's just this whitewashing of history
and then we get more conservative stupidity. We had the
case with Susan Lay announcing that the First Fleet in
seventeen eighty eight was like Elon Musk's mission to Mars,
(06:14):
and that the First Fleet didn't actually come out to
destroy or to pillage, even though that's exactly what they did,
and things like this coming from the Liberal Party. They're
not done by accident. These are carefully calibrated messages, designed
to upset and designed to get the intention. And then
he gets picked up and ramped up by the media.
(06:36):
He's the ABC deciding that it's best to ask the
Treasurer Jim Chalmers what he thinks about Susan Lay's comments.
Speaker 1 (06:43):
Susan Lee has compared the arrival of the First Fleet
with Elon Musk's efforts to build a colony on Mars.
The Prime Minister criticized her, what do you.
Speaker 4 (06:53):
Think is wrong with the comparison?
Speaker 5 (06:56):
Well, Honestly, if I focused my time and energy on
crazy that Susan Lee says, you know, I wouldn't get
anything else done. I think the maddest thing that Susan
Lee has said was when she was asked a year
ago this month whether the coalition would roll back Labour's
tax cuts for every taxpayer. She said that was absolutely
their position. And so I can't focus on mad stuff
(07:18):
that Susan Lee says from time to time life.
Speaker 3 (07:21):
Why do you think it's mad though?
Speaker 5 (07:22):
Well, it's mad because at a time when people are
under cost of living pressure, they've got a government, this
Labor government under Anthony Albanezi focused on the cost of
living and beating inflation, and they've got a coalition led
by Peter Dutton focused on conflict and culture wars. And
that's what this speech was all about. It was deliberately
written to try and provoke a response. I'm not going
to take the bait Susan Lee says crazy stuff all
(07:45):
of the time. I'm focused on the cost of living,
they're focused on culture wars. I'll keep doing my job
without obsessing over every kind of b grade speech that
Susan Lee gives.
Speaker 2 (07:57):
So all of this gets your attention valuable time by
talking about this rubbish and not the other more important issues.
And this is what this strategy is all about. Create
the outrage and waste everybody's time.
Speaker 3 (08:09):
That Suzanne Lay spoke in her church, fine, she absolutely
has that right. Probably she would see it as part
of her responsibilities as a local member, although I don't
know that. Well, no, i'll be fair. She might have
spoken in the local mosco or synagogue if they'd asked,
or temple. I won't go there, but certainly it didn't
seem to be a terribly newsworthy speech, and with an
(08:32):
embarrassing piece of historical analysis like that, that would have
been one that you might have put on your website
for a couple of days and quietly taken down. Instead,
it gets national coverage and is less quietly taken down
because once people realized just what a inept and inapt
comparison it was, it didn't last well. So it was
(08:55):
clearly Suzanne Lay trying to take advantage of a slow
news and try and take up some of the oxygen
that might have been taken up by say, lower inflation figures,
a rising jobs rate, things like that. Speculation that the
Reserve Bank might cut rates before May. It didn't really
(09:15):
work because it wasn't an idea that could sustain much
beyond all the two completely different things. And also Elon
Musk has blooded his copybook and is liked by fewer
and fewer people. So if the press wasn't so soft
towards the Liberal Party, it wouldn't have got to run
(09:35):
at all, except maybe in a derisive and humiliating way
for her.
Speaker 2 (09:40):
And there was also a different type of outrage, and
it wasn't about Willworths not selling Australia A T shirts
or thongs or anything like that, but it was about
another T shirt worn by Grace Tame to the Australian
of the Year reception at the Lodge in Canberra. And
the T shirt worn by Grace Tame had the words
fuck Murdoch on the front of them, and this created
(10:01):
more outrage for Sky News and the Australian newspaper. And
the Prime Minister didn't say anything at the time, but
the day after this is what he had to say.
Speaker 6 (10:11):
It was clearly designed to get attention. I don't intend
to add to that attention because I do think that
it takes away from what the day should be about,
which is the amazing people who were nominated as Australians
of the Year.
Speaker 2 (10:31):
And of course this was done to seek attention because
the Murdoch Empire has got a cancerous influence on not
just Australian politics, but politics in Britain and in the
United States and nothing is being done about it. And
maybe Anthony Alberenezi was upset about not getting his own
T shirt to wear around the lodge. But if his
(10:52):
government had implemented a Royal commission into the Murdoch Empire,
as was requested by over half a million people through
that petition organized by Kevin Rudd a few years ago,
well Grace Tame wouldn't have had to wear the T
shirt and we wouldn't be talking about it today.
Speaker 3 (11:09):
I thought it was appalling that she had such an
offensive word on the T shirt. I'd have felt a
lot easier if she'd blocked out the U so it
just had m asterix rdch But she wore what she wore,
so that's okay. Again. If we live in a country
the champions free speech, she had every right to use it.
(11:29):
Of Course, the free speech warriors only like free speech
when it agrees with them. If it doesn't agree with them,
then it's got to be suppressed, repressed, put down and
shut away. It was hardly surprising that Grace Tame, who
you might describe as a provocateur, and I don't mean
that in any disparaging way by the way others might.
I genuinely don't would wear something like that.
Speaker 2 (11:51):
Well, no, and Els wants to talk about this stuff,
so she decided to raise it as an issue exactly.
Speaker 3 (11:56):
And it is true that the Murdoch we suffered nine
years of an inept, corrupt, incompetent government featuring such people
as Joe Hockey, Scott Morrison, Angus Taylor, because the majority
owner of the press in Australia didn't really ever hold
them to account. Despite what they may argue, Tony Abbott
(12:17):
should have lost the prime ministership the minuity ran out
of parliament to try and stop a division, or tried
to run out of parliament and then was forced to vote,
yet went on to become Prime minister after he ate
the onion. Instead, we had to put up with him
for nearly two years. Malcolm Turnbull had to deal with
a completely feral cabinet because it suited Murdoch. Now, be fair,
(12:40):
I'm not sure that Turnbull would have been a great
prime minister or even a terribly good one, but his
views were more in line with centrist Australia than his
predecessor or his successor. And of course Scott Morrison the
most venal corrupt prime minister we ever had. And I
know that there's probably some of you out there saying, oh,
but what about elbow? Yeah, no, not even clothes. We
(13:03):
will be discussing Anthony Albernezi later, of course, but compared
to Morrison, he's Alfred Deacon or Golf whitlerm or Bob Menzies.
And that's not including the lives destroyed through other means,
the celebrity lives destroyed people like in the UK, where
there's a little bit more freedom to speak up Steve
(13:24):
Coogan and Hugh Grant, let alone, Harry and Megan who
withdrew their case, but only after a massive payment. And
there's legal glitch which meant that you either took the
massive amount of money on offer or you ended up
paying more even if you won, which is why some
people tried to say, oh you back down, he back down,
But in fact it makes no sense, but they got
(13:45):
a written apology and a attraction dating back to nineteen
ninety seven, so that while it mightn't have been everything
there after, that that was a huge thing over here.
Apart from a few like Grace Tame, we don't get
a lot of that level of criticism of the press
from people who have been affected. But I'll be fair,
Murdoch's tentacles run deep. And if you're trying to make
(14:08):
a living as an entertainer or commentator or what have
you annoying the person who owns eighty percent of the
outlets plus publishing, radio, et cetera, it's very difficult to
speak out. So you know, again another reason to say
good or you Grace team.
Speaker 2 (14:26):
So with all this Australia Day business like, I don't
know exactly what the best solutions are. This is the
outrace that comes out every single year. And I'm pretty
sure that if it wasn't about Australia Day, if Australia
Day was moved somewhere else, if it wasn't about Australia Day,
conservatives in the media would just find something else to
be outraged about. And David you suggested moving the day
(14:49):
of Australia Day to a different day. But historically Australia
did not exist on the twenty sixth of January in
seventeen eighty eight, that legal annexation was known as New
South Wales, and before that this land mass was understood
by Europeans to be New Holland, and the idea of
terror australis for Europeans well. It also included the land
(15:12):
mass of what is now known as Antarctica, and the
word Australia didn't become official until eighteen twenty four, and
it didn't exist as a country until January the first
nineteen I won when it was federated, and David, you
and I are creative people were always looking for creative solutions.
So perhaps we could have Australia Day on January the
(15:36):
first every year, which is technically, legally and historically correct,
and if people are worried about missing out on that
holiday towards the end of January, we'll have the last
Monday of January as the public holiday and you can
call it whatever you want on that day. So I
think that might be a meaningful solution for everyone.
Speaker 3 (15:55):
A few people have pointed out that January twenty six
has had other significances. The Australian Citizenship Law of forty
six was passed on the twenty sixth of January, meaning
that Australians could actually identify as Australians and not just
citizens of the British Commonwealth. It became a political and
national identity, not just a geographical one. The other one
(16:19):
there was a lovely meme going round which kind of
got it wrong a little bit. But the rum rebellion
the New South Wales started on the twenty sixth of
January in eighteen ten, which led to the brief overthrow
of the Bligh governorship and New South Wales being run
by shady corporates who were in it for money. Now
you might argue that in fact that was a very
(16:40):
successful coup that is still happening. But nonetheless it was
one of those things that Australians liked to think happened,
the plucky young locals overthrowing a corrupt system. Not quite,
but we could celebrate that. Still very New South Wales centric,
of course, I think May the first is a good day.
(17:01):
I think January first makes the most sense because the
Federation of Australia doesn't actually have any connotations. Oh, got
to be careful saying this because it doesn't improve things
for Indigenous people. But at least it wasn't further abrogation
of Indigenous rights and privileges and all of the things
that Indigenous people should have. So yeah, and then I'm
(17:24):
sure we can find something at the end of January. Unfortunately,
Elvis Presley's birthday is the eighth of January, so it's
maybe a bit soon. Well, I might get people to
work a bit quicker and you don't get the dead
Sydney and Melbourne month from Christmas Eve to Australia Day.
We go Christmas Eve to January eighth.
Speaker 2 (17:42):
Well, there are solutions out there if any people start
looking for them.
Speaker 3 (17:45):
Yeah. But for some reason, I know Andrew Bolt tried
to go viral with his claim that it should be
October nineteen, the day we voted no to the Voice,
and that died as it should have been offensive, racist
and justice stupid idea and didn't go anywhere. I think
there's a date in which we have the celebratory day
(18:06):
on first to January and then Sorry Day or some
such on the twenty sixth, where it's a day of
reflection and morning like Anzac Day should be.
Speaker 1 (18:20):
This is New Politics with Eddie Jokovic and David lewis
the best podcast on Australian politics and news commentary. You
can support us through Patreon and substack, and also find
us at Newpolitics dot com dot au.
Speaker 7 (19:08):
I gotta been sunbathing on the beach. You have never
seen a body so beautiful. Much better that, much better
than slippy Joel.
Speaker 2 (19:20):
Now usual warning to audience members who were triggered by
a certain President of the United States will be talking
about this guy for the next fifteen minutes or so,
so you can look away or point your ears in
a different direction for a little while. But Donald Trump
is the president of the United States and this is
his second term, and saying this in twenty twenty five
(19:42):
is as bizarre as when we first said it back
in twenty seventeen. And if people think that Susan Lay's
comments about the first Fleet and the visit to Mars
was bad enough, well that's nothing compared to Trump's first
week in office, where he threatened to take over the
Panama Canal, demanded to take Greenland from Denmark and if
(20:03):
they didn't, he'd consider that to be an active hostility
and officially changed the name of the Golf of Mexico,
which is the way there's been known since fifteen fifty
to the Gulf of America. And this was just the
first week, but this whole process will continue for the
next two hundred and seven weeks that he's going to
be in office. And all of this really is a
(20:26):
smoke screen for what's really going on. The United States
cannot take the Panama Canal. It's on Panamanian soil. And
although there was a Treaty for the Panama Canal Zone
where the US had control of the canal up until
nineteen seventy seven, that was a negotiated agreement, and what
Trump is proposing would be an act of war. And
the same with Greenland, that's been a part of Denmark
(20:48):
since eighteen fourteen and they've had self government since nineteen
seventy nine. But this is all part of the Mayhem,
as was Elon Musk's Nazi Saloon.
Speaker 4 (21:01):
You know, there are elections that the elections that come
and go. Some elections are you know, important, some or not.
But this one, this one, this one really matters. And
I just want to say thank you for making it happen.
Thank you, My heart goes out here. It is thanks
(21:30):
to you that the future of civilization is assured.
Speaker 2 (21:35):
These are all distractions, and in the background, Trump has
appointed some pretty corrupt people into government. He started to
wind back women's rights, he's winding back lgbt q I rights,
He's removing diversity, He's promoted the ethnic cleansing of Palestine.
And all of this is taking place at the moment
while everyone else is busy with all these questions about,
(21:56):
oh well, can Trump really take Greenland and Panama Canal?
Can he really do all of this? Or can he
not do this? Is Elon Musk really a Nazi or
is he a Mussolini supporter or is it just a
Roman salute? You know what's going on there. You know
these are all classics smoke screens, and it's going to
be mayhem. This has only been the first week, but
it's going to be mayhem. Corruption and incompetence on a
(22:17):
grand scale, just as it was in the first.
Speaker 3 (22:20):
Term, and worse, I think, because in the first term
they didn't quite know what they were doing. The second
term they know what they're doing, and they've got a
bit more control. In the House. What's going to thwart
him is state power. He's already lost some court cases
in key states based on who's allowed to live there,
(22:41):
for example, the Supreme courts on each side. But it
will be very difficult for the Supreme Court to uphold
some of the unconstitutional things that he has done. Birthright
citizenship thing, for example, completely trying to take off the
citizenship of people who were born here or sorry not
born here, born in the United States. I've been watching
(23:02):
and reading a lot on it, so the language has
infused me. I do apologize, dear listener who were born
in the United States, even if their parents weren't. And
of course it's nobody can really control where they're born.
And if your parents went over as undocumented people and
you were born there, you're in the States. And that's true.
If your parents were there on holidays for six weeks.
(23:24):
Why you'd book a holiday six weeks before you were
having a baby, I don't know, but it happens. Or
if you were born on an American ship, for example,
your parents may be full German citizens. Germany has a
slightly different citizenship. If your parents are German, then your German.
It's a bit like the British one. It's not about
where you were born, it's about who your parents were written.
(23:45):
It's the same Australia, I think, is the same for America.
To change that would be to overturn a whole lot
of precedents that will be very problematic for it to maintain.
And while we're looking at people who weren't there fully legally.
Elon Musku was an illegal immigrant Milania. Trump was really
(24:05):
an illegal immigrant brought over. And so it's one of
those things that as they go through into churches and
schools and workplaces, places where you'd expect to be safe
and take people. He's talking about in closing them all
on Guantanamo Bay, where they'll be concentrated in one area.
Now hold a second, where have I heard this before?
Speaker 2 (24:27):
It's okay, you can say we've heard it all before
back in Nazi Germany pretty much.
Speaker 3 (24:31):
I was going to say, back in South Africa with
the British and the Boors. But same thing. They're looking
at concentration camp. Whether that will lead to the outcome
of the German concentration camps remains to be seen, but
it's not a good look.
Speaker 2 (24:46):
And for me, United States politics is a bit of
a joke even when the Democrats are in office, and
I think it will be more of a joke over
the next four years. But it's not a joke for
the rest of the world. The US is still the
most powerful and most influential country in the world. Now
it might not be for too much longer with the
rise of China, but my feeling is that it's going
(25:08):
to become a lot more extreme the entire country. And
Trump has changed the process of modern politics. That idea
of the idiot king, the noise and the mayhem and
the outright idiocy that all seems to get the rewards
in modern day politics. And of course we've seen all
of this before. We saw it with Mussolini in Italy,
we saw it with Hitler and Germany. We're seen in
(25:29):
quite a few countries well throughout history, all across the world,
and it's always a big show that has disastrous consequences
for not just the country, but for the entire world.
And I think we also have to think about what
all of this means for Australia and for that alliance
with the United States, and I think it gives us
an opportunity to start forging creative alliances elsewhere, and that
(25:54):
doesn't mean giving up on the United States. But over
the next twenty years or so, I think stronger alliances
and relationships have to be formed with other countries, with China,
with Indonesia, with India reassessing the Orcas arrangement, which is
purely in the interests of the United States and Britain.
It's definitely not an Australia's interests. And I think if
(26:16):
Australia did have a stronger and better alliance with China,
I'm not saying that it's terrible. At the moment. It
has been patched up by the alban Easy government and
China is already Australia's biggest trading partner by far. If
you had a much stronger and better alliance with China,
well you wouldn't need to buy all of those nuclear
submarines under the Orcas agreement, which we're not probably not
(26:39):
going to get.
Speaker 3 (26:39):
Anyway, no exactly. I mean they've already admitted there's no
submarines coming, not even in thirty years.
Speaker 2 (26:47):
I think there's a couple of tanks coming away in
a few little boats.
Speaker 3 (26:50):
Oh thank goodness, that'll keep them out. Three tanks and
two boots. And again we've had trade dealings with Indonesia
for one hundred and fifty years, probably more if you
include indigenous trade with Indonesia. Papua New Guinea is closer
to the Australian mainland than Tasmania is, and that's important
to remember. It's a quick hop on a canoe, a
(27:12):
couple of hours on the canoe, and you're really on
what is now modern Indonesia or parts of it Arian
Jaya and things like that. But since white settlement we've
traded with China, Japan and now Korea, Indonesia, Cambodia and happily.
And the Keating idea that the far East to them
(27:32):
is the near North to us remains very true. And
having good relationships and they won't always be harmonious relationships.
We clash with New Zealand all the time, which is
culturally not identical but very close to Australia, doesn't mean
we're going to war with them, doesn't mean that we're
not going to stop trading with New Zealand. It doesn't
(27:52):
mean that New Zealand stops being an extremely important neighbor
and ally and friend. It just means that kind tries
have to look after their own self interest and it's
the same if we were able to do that with India.
I didn't quite dig into it because I'm not a
sports watcher, but there was some talk about the number
of Indian people at the cricket in Melbourne and how
(28:14):
many of them were local, and this is great. I mean,
if you want people, it doesn't matter where what background
do you have. If you're buying a ticket, surely the
cricket people would be happy, and I'm sure the cricket
people were happy that they got sold out tickets. But
there was a little bit of oh why are there
so many Indians here in that subtext way that the
mainstream press can do. But a very important country to
(28:37):
Australian multiculturalism and Australian culture, as is China. We've had
Chinese immigration here since at least eighteen thirty. There are
families who are of Chinese descent who have been here
for longer than a lot of people of Anglo descent.
The big Celtic wave only happens in the famine with
the gold rushers and things in the eighteen fifties. That's
(28:59):
when a lot of Chinese immigrants come out too, and
so we have that We've had very good relations with
Japan since the nineteen fifties, with the cars, with the televisions,
with all the other stuff we brought from Japan, which
we're now buying really from China and Indonesia to try
and prop up a very western centric or very euro
(29:23):
centric and I'm using European very broadly here, meaning also
the United States seems to me to be a bit shortsighted.
Not to say, as you rightly said, we don't have
to get rid of them, and they don't stop being
important to us, but Australian national interest has to move
away from being essentially the lap dog and being a firm,
(29:44):
strong member of the international community who is as friends
to as many people as it's possible to be friends with.
Speaker 2 (30:04):
And we can also see that the Liberal Party is
now pretty much copying what the Trump administration is doing,
even though the ABC published an article during the week
claiming that Peter Dunton isn't going to use the Trump
playbook in the lead up to the next federal election. Now,
I'm not sure where the ABC has been over the
past year, but that's exactly what Peter Dunton has been doing.
(30:25):
He hasn't been dancing along to the village people, but
pretty much everything else he's been doing is straight from
the Trump playbook.
Speaker 3 (30:33):
And you'll have to excuse me, Eddie, I've got to
get some bleach to wipe that image out of my eyes.
Speaker 2 (30:38):
I'll pass it over to you. And during the week,
Peter Dunton announced Just Center Price as the spokesperson for
Government Efficiency and that's an exact replica of Trump's Department
of Government Efficiency. Well, it's using exactly the same words.
And I think just Center Price might need to look
at her own wasteful expenditure if she wants to be
(30:59):
serious about this. He spent seventy six thousand dollars on
business class flights during the Voice of Parliament referendum in
twenty oh three, spent twenty one thousand dollars on a
flight to attend a Cost of Living committee meeting. She
could also look at Peter Dutton's twenty three thousand dollar
flight to a GENA Reinhart conference, or when he spent
(31:19):
sixty three thousand dollars for himself and his staff members
to fly to another cost of living meeting. There was
also six thousand dollars to attend another Gina Reinhart party,
and then when Jacinder Price has finished up there, she
could actually have a look at all the wasteful routs,
car park routs and corruption instigated by the Liberal Party
(31:39):
when they were in office. So there might actually be
quite a lot of work for her to do here.
But I just thought that the world had had enough
of this Trumpet behavior. I thought that we had enough
of the first term of Donald Trump. Boris Johnson in
the UK, Scott Morrison here, and I thought that this
might just be the end of it all. But it's
also part actually in response to their replacements just being
(32:03):
so underwhelming Joe Biden in the United States and is
follow up Kamala Harris, Kiir Starmer in the UK, Anthony
Albanezy here. And I don't think that they've been bad leaders,
and they've just done what they have to do as
far as the work of government is concerned, but they've
just been so poor politically, and it's almost like they've
(32:23):
created a pathway for these nut jobs to return to office.
And I'm just wondering what can Centerish parties do. And
I'm not going to call them left a center because
they're just not. But all of these convenient idiots like Trump,
Boris Johnson, Scott Morrison, they always present themselves as outsiders,
but they're not. They're all on the right and they're
(32:45):
a solid part of establishment as well. And they just
open up the gates for billionaires and corrupt business people
to get into government I don't mean as members of government,
but to actually influence and they have strong roles within
government itself or whatever you want to call them. I
just don't think that they've worked out a way of
dealing with all of this. Anthony Albeneasy promise change, but
(33:06):
it's been a slow incremental change, you know, as far
as I'm concerned. They've actually been good government, but the
politics has just been absolutely hopeless. And Peter Darton is
just this mindless populace and just says whatever he needs
to say. He's modeling himself exactly on Donald Trump, except
for the village people, of course. But this is what
seems to work in modern day politics, and the right
(33:29):
and the extreme right is just winning out on this level.
Speaker 3 (33:33):
The left made a crucial mistake, I think, and this
goes back to Tony Blair and Clinton Bob Hawk, Paul keating.
We can point to the many, many good things that
those men did, but they took it as read that
the economy couldn't be reformed to a fairer way than neoliberalism,
which is one of the most unfair ways. And we
(33:54):
have people like Jim Chalmers who speak eloquently and deeply
own economic reform, but are prevented from really doing the
major economic reform that is needed to get us out
of this neoliberal con and it is a con. Private
health insurance, what's that It provides nothing, It does nothing.
(34:15):
It just shuffles money from the patient to the health
provider without actually providing any value. Private education in Australia,
it's the same curriculum, it's the same pool it teaches,
it's the same as anywhere else. It provides nothing of
any value, certainly not with some of the elite schools anyway.
(34:36):
The massive fees involve private law enforcement. It's just something
that I can't even begin to And even down to
private media seems to be failing. If it's run fairly
and does a good job, okay, do it. But private
mainstream media where the ABC is cowed by what's happening
(34:57):
outside it. It's editors and journalists don't want to close
off their options for jobs outside the industry or outside
the ABC private infrastructure. Why did the government pay far
more for a private firm to build the road so
they can then profit, then just build the road themselves.
The left has to really take a stand. I think
(35:17):
centrism has died. It stood for nothing, so fell for
everything and has fallen on.
Speaker 2 (35:23):
My point is also that even if the left or
center left, whatever you want to call them, if they
were doing all those good things that were opposed to
neo liberalism, they probably wouldn't get much credit for it.
Speaker 3 (35:34):
And oh they wouldn't.
Speaker 2 (35:35):
It's the populace that are winning out because they do
all of these populous man crazy things like dancing to
the village people. And Jim Chalmers is actually a fan
of the Beastie Boys. Maybe he should start dancing along
to the Beastie Boys when he starts doing his press conferences.
Or maybe Anthony Orbheneaz he should put on some midnight
oil or radio Birdman or something like that. Just do
something different to jack it up a little bit.
Speaker 3 (35:57):
Fight for your right to cut interest rates.
Speaker 2 (35:59):
Or whatever the cases I'm being a little bit facetious,
but I'm just trying to work out, well, why are
the populace and their right wing and their extremist right wing,
why are they winning out on these sort of battles
when they've absolutely got nothing to offer and they do
the opposite of good government.
Speaker 3 (36:14):
Yeah, it's there's a timidity in the left and instead
of standing up like the great leftist reformers did, and
let's be faur the great rightst reformers stood up. Margaret
Thatcher was a terrible PM, but you knew pretty much
where she stood. John Howard was a terrible PM, but
you knew pretty much exactly where he stood. We need
(36:36):
our leftist leaders to stand up and shows where they are,
and it means that they lose votes. Then they lose votes.
It's better to die for something than to fall for anything.
And it's you know, Peter Garrett, it's better to die
on your feet than live on your knees. I know
you didn't say that originally, but while we're quoting songs,
(36:57):
the vested interests have to be cleaned out of Parliament.
I think we should go back to publicly funded elections
with a cap on spending, you get so much everybody
gets approximately the same amount. You're not allowed to take
private donations. It's harder to do this, but you get
rid of somehow. And this is where I'll have to
hand it over to our listeners with ideas. You have
(37:19):
to get rid of those lobbyists who damage I'm actually
all four lobbyists, believe it or not, in that I
have something that I believe is right and I go
in and lobby my local member, the minister, the parliament whomever.
I have no problem with that in principle.
Speaker 2 (37:35):
Well, a cos is a lobbyist.
Speaker 3 (37:37):
Yeah, exactly when people say, oh, we've got to get
rid of lobbyists. So I don't know that I want
to get rid of acos. I don't want to know,
want to get rid of the various housing lobbies and
disable people's lobbies. But we have to get rid of
money as a political tool. Ban private donations, and people say, oh,
can't we cap them? But what happens is that we
caap them at say one hundred dollars a year, and
(37:58):
then suddenly you get three million, one hundred dollars donations from.
Speaker 2 (38:02):
Two people, well indirectly from two people, but that's.
Speaker 3 (38:06):
Directly from two people. We have to think about how
to fix this. Having compulsory voting is great, although they
still try it here. The apathy that both parties are
the same. What's the point I live in a safe seat,
What's the point I live in a swinging seat. It'll
go to the person that I want to vote to.
What's the point? But it does tend to take the
(38:26):
edge off that a bit. In Britain, of course, the
Conservative bus used to take all the Labor voters down,
and the Labor bus used to take all the Conservative
voters down just because the other side wanted to use
the resources of the other side. But we don't need
any of that. Australia has a really great voting model. Yes,
and as we've said in our book, it needs some reform,
(38:47):
but the bones are there to make it one of
the leading democracies in the world, yet there's no will
to do this. Of course, a lot of these reforms
will probably see the party who bring them in kicked out.
But again it's better to go on my Peking principle
changes than to hang around for years and do nothing.
Speaker 1 (39:09):
This is New Politics. Available through Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Amazon,
audible and YouTube, and also available to support it Patreon,
substack and at our website New politics dot com dot au.
Speaker 2 (39:52):
There's been a sea spart deal between Israel and Hummas
and it's already been running for about two weeks. Despite
Israel continuing to kill people within Palestine and southern Lebanon,
the ceasefire is still holding and there will be three
stages to the ceasefire. The first stage was to allow
for a hostage exchange, and we have to remember that
(40:12):
Israel has been keeping Palestinian hostages for many, many years.
The other part is that the Israeli defense forces will
leave Palestinian cities and the larger towns. There'll been influx
of aid and a return of displaced Palestinians, which is
what's been happening over the past couple of days. Stage
two commences next week and there'll be more hostage exchanges.
(40:35):
Israel to make a complete withdrawal from Gaza and a
permanent ceasefire, and then Stage three will see the return
of bodies of hostages who have died and the reconstruction
of Gaza will commence, which will probably take decades to complete. Now,
the state of Israel hasn't achieved any of its objectives.
(40:55):
It's killed at least forty five thousand Palestinians, possibly up
to two hundred thousand. It's accepted a ceasefi idea that
was actually on offer in May twenty twenty four and
it rejected at the time. The government of Benjamin Netnaho
has corroded so much that it's almost on the verge
of collapse. The war has cost Israel billions and billions
(41:17):
of dollars, and its economy is also on the verge
of collapse. Now Netanya, who specifically said that the aim
was to wipe out Hamas and Hummas, is still there.
It's probably even stronger than it was before Israel started
this war. The war has been a complete waste of time,
like most wars are, and in my opinion, Israel has
(41:38):
lost this process. Even though it inflicted most of the
pain on Palestine through death and destruction and wiping out
about eighty percent of all the infrastructure, schools, and hospitals.
Speaker 3 (41:48):
It's been so upsetting. As bad as that October seven
attack was, and it was, it didn't justify what has happened.
The only Hummas leader they've court with the person they
had in charge of negotiating the peace deal. They killed him.
They've finally negotiated a peace and I think that's because
most of the world has realized just how bad the
(42:12):
Israeli government is, and net Nyahu realized that something had
to be done. The ceasefire is a good thing. It
should have happened months ago, and ideally we shouldn't have
needed a ceasefire, but we're dealing with quite untrustworthy people,
and anything can happen. I don't think we're on the
road to a lasting peace in Gaza just yet.
Speaker 2 (42:34):
Oh that's try. But a ceasefire always has to be welcomed.
Anything that stops people from dying, well, of course that
has to be welcomed. But it's never going to be
a permanent ceasefire unless there is a just, of course resolution,
and there's nothing that suggests that that's going to be
the case. And you know, I'm just left wondering how
that would ever arise. So the United States President has
(42:56):
proposed shifting Palestinians to Jordan and Egypt, and guess what,
that's exactly what happened in nineteen forty six with the Knakbar.
It's also known as ethnic cleansing, and President Trump should
know that that is a bad thing, but he doesn't.
And a better solution, as far as I'm concerned, would
be to clear out the Israeli settlers from West Bank
and for Israel to completely remove itself from Gaza and
(43:19):
the West Bank and then start looking at southern Lebanon,
Golan Heights and a lot of the other areas. And
this will still take many years to resolve if it
ever does happen. And maybe if we see collapse of
the Netanyahu government or for Benjamin net Yahoo to be
removed from israel politics, that might be a start, although
(43:41):
there's probably always going to be another right wing extremist
available to replace Benjamin Nen Yahoo. But I just think
that Israeli society needs to fundamentally change, as well as
well as the unchallenged support for the state of Israel
among Western leaders. But I just feel that we might
be waiting for a long time before that happens.
Speaker 3 (44:01):
We've got quite a lot of factors, not least the
fact that the Netanyahu and a lot of his cabinet
are doing their very best to stay out of jail
while they're in power. It's harder to put them into jail.
You've got all that oil and gas in the Bay,
and that's really what this is all about, getting access
(44:22):
to that. In a sense, it's just nineteen nineteen all
over again and Lawrence of Arabia and all of that
bigger powers going in and you've got the three or four,
you've got America. I think you still have British interests
trying to hold on as best as they can. Now
they don't have the EU. You've got Russia trying to
get hold of this stuff. So Putin, who is a
(44:45):
sereal disruptor, is doing his best as well. And I
think one of the figures that we have to keep
a closer eye on is Vladimir Putin. Access to that
those resources is a huge thing. Also, it's a good
central spot to have a safe space for your military
to be based, and so the United States I think
(45:06):
we'd love to have a couple of bases in Palestine
near the Bay there, just so they can get to
places a bit more quickly than they can. I don't
think that's a good idea, but I think that's what
they're after.
Speaker 2 (45:18):
And that's what's happening geopolitically within the area, and a
lot of people still ask us, well, what's all of
this got to do with Australia, And it's actually got
a lot to do with Australia, not directly, but indirectly
and locally. Israel politics plays out in so many different ways.
Peter Dutton has just continued his attacks from last year,
and as we've mentioned quite a few times before, he's
(45:40):
always looking for an opportunity to create division and this
just gives him another opportunity. Now he's claiming that the
government has done very little to stop anti Semitism in Australia,
without suggesting what else they could do that's any different
to what they're doing at the moment. He said that
Foreign Minister Senator Penny Wong shouldn't have gone to the
Auschwitz Memorial to commemorate eighty years since the end of
(46:04):
the Holocaust, made a big deal about that, and this
all feeds into right wing sentiments in Australia. And it's
not just Peter Dutton who's been politicizing anti Semitism. It's
the Zionist lobby in Australia, who, in my opinion, have
got far too much influence in this country and they've
been attacking anyone who disagrees with them, including other members
(46:27):
of the Jewish community. They've attacked the journalist Anthony Lowenstein,
calling him a self loathing Jew. They've attacked the CEO
of the Moderate Jewish Council of Australia, Sarah Schwartz, and
then the attacks are all continued by Sky News. Sarah
Schwartz responding to Peter Dutton and News corporation and their
politicization of anti Semitism.
Speaker 8 (46:50):
So, I gave a speech at an anti racism conference
and my speech was about how Peter Duttan and the
Coalition and far eight actors around the world are exploiting
the Jewish community and the rise in anti Semitism to
fuel division and hatred towards other racialized groups. And I
think that this incident speaks exactly to why that message
(47:11):
is so important. Already we have seen Peter Dudden, you know,
throw point fingers, and Anthony Albanesi suggests security measures when
we have absolutely no knowledge about the ideological motives of
what is happening here. So I think, I think, you know,
the Murdoch Press and the Coalition have a very big
incentive to exploit you know what I said in my speech.
(47:31):
But the fact that they have chosen this week, rather
than actually addressing a rise in anti Semitism, to go
after me for making a point that they are using
the Jewish community as political footballs, I think speaks volumes
to the way that these people treat Jews and anti Semitism.
And you know, they really have not shown that they
have an interest in actually addressing these really real rises
(47:54):
in anti Semitism, and they are confecting outrage and that
is making Jewish people more scared. They need to get
real and actually stop using our community as political footballs.
Speaker 2 (48:05):
I think that these are the people who have done
their best to whip up the anti Semitism in Australia,
the Zionus Lobby and Peter Dutton, And that does not
condone at all any of the fire bombing attacks or
Nazi graffiti that's occurred in the eastern suburbs of Sydney
or parts of Melbourne, even though there have been suggestions
from the Australian Federal Police that there are foreign entities
(48:27):
and foreign actors involved here, and who knows that might
even include Mussad. But if they all just shut up
and stop politicizing Israel and Gaza for their own base purposes.
A lot of this might not be actually happening.
Speaker 3 (48:40):
You're right, the criticism that the Labor government isn't pro
Israel enough. Again, what is in Australia's national interest, Surely
supporting its own citizens, Surely keeping out of another Middle
Eastern conflict that has very little effect on us except militarily,
because we get involved for no reason. It's been happening
(49:00):
since Gallipoli and it never ends well. I've noticed that
the anti Semitic attacks, the New South Wales police have
come out and said one of them seems to be
in a setup, that it wasn't quite what it seemed,
that there was too much suspicious behavior around it to
suggest that it was a genuine attack against Jewish people,
which should be condemned. By the way people attacking Jewish
(49:23):
people should be condemned, people attacking Middle Eastern people should
be condemned, people attacking Asian should be condemned, people attacking
Anglos should be condemned, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera.
Seems to be the actions of a group who have
ever played their hand, have lost control and are trying
to fix things by doubling down. Penny Wong, whose public
(49:44):
words have been in favor of Israel defending itself copyright trademark,
has been called a very unenthusiastic supporter of Israel. Well, one,
she's the Australian Foreign Minister, so that's got nothing to
do with anything whether she supports Israel or doesn't support
his rale, provided, of course she's not anti Jewish in
(50:06):
this you can love a country and not support its government.
I'm looking at you United States, I'm looking at you
Australia under the Liberal Party, the language used to try
and normalize abhorrent behavior. She didn't support the genocide. He
made some mild words of rebuke against us. She must
(50:27):
be anti Semitic, despite all evidence to the contrary. Jeremy Corbyn,
who had stood up all his career against anti Semitism,
was claimed to be anti Semitic. The Labor Party finally
admitted that they made that up so he wouldn't be
leader of the Labor Party, and that has cost them
very dearly. One it led us to Boris Johnson as
(50:47):
Prime Minister, and two Labor is now floundering in office
because it can't really differentiate itself from the Conservative Party.
Speaker 2 (50:56):
What's also the situation for what is the Labor government
mean to do in this situation? And we're being critical
of the Prime Minister for he almost one hundred percent
support for the State of Israel and almost totally indifference
to the plight of Palestinians. But I think the biggest
problem for him with all of this is political. Now
setting aside the morality of being totally indifferent to the
(51:18):
clear and obvious attempts of genocide and gata, and I
know that's a hard one to ignore, but we'll just
set that aside for the time being. But just politically,
Anthony Albanese is in nowhere land on this issue. And
I think that the lesson in Australia is that unless
a political leader is two hundred percent behind Israel, they
(51:38):
will suffer politically. And because Albanzi has only been ninety
nine point nine percent in his support of the state
of Israel, he's suffered politically. You know that zero point
one percent where he hasn't supported the state of Israel. Well,
that's open up this avenue for the Zionus lobby and
Peter Dutton to attack him politically. And because of this,
(52:00):
he doesn't look strong. He's been made to look weak.
This week he's announced two Holocaust education centers in Perth
and Canberra. Now, before I get accused of anti semitism,
I'm not saying that this is a bad thing. But
where's the education centers about Islamophobia in Australia or a
museum about the history of the neckbar from nineteen forty six? Well,
(52:21):
there isn't one in Australia. And because there is now
a cease firing in place in Gaza, and if this continues,
well it might be less of an issue by the
time of the next federal election in Australia. But even
if the issue itself isn't a factor of the next election,
and to be honest, it probably won't be at all.
(52:42):
And also, the people who have decided that they're not
going to vote for the Labor Party at the next
election because of their position on Gaza, well I don't
think they're likely to preference the Liberal Party above the
Labor Party about this unless they do it as a
process vote. But I think all of this is more
about how managing this issue is reflected in the leadership
(53:04):
of the Prime Minister. And if the electorate sensors weakness
in a leader, and if they don't know anything at
all about the issue that they're being weak in, I
think that that spills over to other areas and the
electorate might be thinking, well, if they're weak on that issue,
what else are they being weak on? And I suppose
that generally the electorate does focus on the matters related
(53:26):
to the economy when it comes to election time. But
I'd say that Anthony Albernezi will just be hoping that
the issue of Gaza just goes away for the next
five or six months and that the issue doesn't crop
up during the election to remind people of that weakness.
Speaker 3 (53:42):
People will notice weakness and lack before they notice positive stuff,
and I'm sure many of you have had that experience.
You know, you've done a really great job on something
and someone will walk in and say, oh, you missed
a bit, for example, And you can magnify that in
government because you have approximately half the population against what
(54:05):
you're doing anyway, And then on your side there'll be
people who don't think you've gone far enough or done enough,
or wouldn't have done it that way. It's easy to criticize,
hard to do. That's why we're in the criticizing business.
Doing nothing will cost you far more politically than standing up.
I said this earlier, but again it's absolutely true. You
(54:27):
will at least get the acknowledgment of your enemies that
you tried to do something, and you might even swing
a few of the waiver its, and your supporters will
find it hard to find that stuff to criticize. Being
timid in the face of bullying is never a good look,
especially if you're the leader of the twelfth biggest economy
(54:48):
in the world and trying to be original superpower. To
be cowed by vested interests, to be suppressed by vested
interests doesn't bode well politically, and the preference flows will
swing towards labor. But it only takes a handful of
seats where you don't get enough of a preference flow
when it goes to a strong independence or Greens or
(55:09):
and you're out of government. Now again, I don't think
this is necessarily a bad thing, But if I was
in government and some of the stuff they've started to
do is starting to coalesce into something good and coaless
into long term positive reform, I'd want to be trying
to hold onto government so that the next term, in
which it seems they've planned a lot for, isn't bogged
down by endless negotiations by recalcitrant independence or opposition parties.
Speaker 2 (55:40):
That's it for this episode of New Politics. Thanks for
listening in, and if you'd like to support our style
of journalism and commentary, please make your donation at our
website at newpolitics dot com dot au. We don't beg, plead,
beseech or gaslight you about journalism coming to an end.
We just keep it very simple. If you like what
we do, please send some support our way. It keeps
(56:01):
our commitment to independent journalism ticking along. I'm Eddie Jokovic.
Thanks for listening in, and it's goodbye to our listeners.
Speaker 3 (56:08):
I'm David Lewis. We'll see you next time.
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Special Summer Offer: Exclusively on Apple Podcasts, try our Dateline Premium subscription completely free for one month! With Dateline Premium, you get every episode ad-free plus exclusive bonus content.
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!