[LINK] End of the filter? Better off without a Stalinist, censorious, Labor government.

[thoughtmaybe.com]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Kim Holburn" <kim at holburn.net>


> On 2010/Aug/08, at 3:52 PM, Robin Whittle wrote:
...

>>  In practical terms, their asylum seeker policies don't seem to
>>  be producing a better outcome than the Coalition's.  The
>>  people smugglers are back in business because there is, or was,
>>  again a benefit in turning up unannounced in Australian
>>  territories.
>
> I find this vacuous.  The Australian government has not and has never
> caused boat people to come or not.  In the current case it is wars in
> Sri Lanka and two wars we are involved in that have disrupted other
> countries enough to make people want to come to Australia enough to
> risk a boat journey.  This whole thing about people smugglers is
> weasel words.  If people have enough need they will find a way to do
> it.  In the case of the previous government they upped the immigration
> quotas - that was what probably stopped the boats.  The rest is all
> spin.  Europe gets half a million clandestini - "illegal" imigrants if
> you like - per year.  Half a million per year.  We think we have
> problems.


Yes, the whole thing is bullshit. Scaremongering.

Check out this graphic:
http://content.thoughtmaybe.com/images/2009ScaremongeringImmigration.jpg



> If we are part of a disruptive war in another country we have a moral
> obligation to help the people we have disrupted.  We loudly tout that
> we have a great country and a great government and we wonder why
> people want to come here?
>
> Also - we have signed the UN Refugee convention.  Refugees reaching
> Australia are not illegal, on the contrary, we have legal treaty
> obligations to them.

Exactly. The same is true of Australia's indigenous people. We've got many 
legal obligations to make up for there...
http://thoughtmaybe.com/topic/indigenous-australia


...

>>  In practical terms, the government has not yet achieved any
>>  progress on global warming.  I think there has been too little
>>  support for solar thermal power, including those systems which
>>  store the heat overnight.
>
> Both our major parties are beholden either to industry owners or
> industrial unions and neither is going to be really interested in
> doing anything about climate change.
>
> Australia is the biggest coal exporter in the world and we are the one
> of the biggest CO2 emmitters per capita.  It's going to require
> massive change in our infrastructure and massive community pressure
> for change.  Neither major party can or will do it without us.


And this is probably one of the best ways to have things change anyway --  
individuals become aware and enact changes in their own ways/lives that 
result in collective change. Even just consuming less can obviously make a 
dramatic impact, not only on atmospheric equilibrium, but on the fundamental 
basics of ecology that we've become so distanced from... The land/soil, 
water, rejuvenation cycles, etc..

http://thoughtmaybe.com/video/global-warming-tipping-point-ahead

...

>> In trying to find something to be happy about with Labor, there are a
>> few: quarantining welfare payments and plain label cigarette
>> packages, both of which I think will have significant and lasting
>> health benefits which can't be achieved by other means.  Generally
>> Labor has been more supportive for Medicare and public health.
...

> Neither seem like a great choice.  It's like that slogan "The least
> worst choice".

Exactly and this is by design. It's always been a false choice for as long 
as I can remember.
http://thoughtmaybe.com/topic/elections

Both parties are there to ensure contiunation of the same -- corpocracy.

In the words of John Pilger, one of the few real Australian journalists: 
"The major western democracies are moving towards corporatism. Democracy has 
become a business plan, with a bottom line for every human activity, every 
dream, every decency, every hope. The main parliamentary parties are now 
devoted to the same economic policies - socialism for the rich, capitalism 
for the poor - and the same foreign policy of servility to endless war. This 
is not democracy. It is to politics what McDonalds is to food." (2009)