Archive for April, 2005

Frank on Class

Thomas Frank, author of What’s the Matter with Kansas? has published a very interesting article in The New York Review of Books looking at another aspect of the class wars - although class is the great unmentionable in terms of economic issues, the right wing cultural warriors routinely stir up class resentment over “liberal elites”:

The reason conservatives are always thought to be tough and liberals to be effete milquetoasts (two favorite epithets from the early days of the backlash) even when they aren’t is the same reason Americans believe the French to be a nation of sissies and the same reason the Dead End Kids found it both easy and satisfying to beat up the posh boy from the luxury apartment building: the cultural symbolism of class. If you relish chardonnay/lattes/ snowboarding, you will not fight. If you talk like a Texan, you are a two-fisted he-man who knows life’s hardships and are ready to scrap at a moment’s notice. This is the reason conservative authors and radio demagogues find it so easy to connect liberals and terrorists. It is the same reason, by extension, that old-time political nicknames like “the Fighting Liberal” make no sense to us anymore and that current foreign policy failures like North Korean nuclear proliferation do not bring lasting discredit on President Bush: in the face of such crises one is either a wimp or a hard guy, and we’ve already got a hard guy in there.

Menzies Redux?

In a significant shift from his previous rhetoric, John Howard has rekindled the Liberal leadership fires:

John Howard has declared he is “not planning on going anywhere” and predicts he can beat Kim Beazley at the next election.

In comments that will anger his Treasurer and heir apparent, Peter Costello, Mr Howard said he was “not planning my post-prime ministerial life”.

Asked in an interview with News Limited newspapers if he could beat Mr Beazley a third time, Mr Howard said: “Yes, I’d hope so. Try.”

Mr Costello is said by supporters to be already agitated by Mr Howard’s refusal to signal a handover of the leadership, and could be expected to reconsider his position as Liberal Party deputy.

The balls in Costello’s court, I’d suggest. But I’d be surprised if he runs with it.

Elsewhere: Tim Dunlop makes a similar argument:

In fact, at this stage anyway, the real leadership battle of interest is the one inside the Liberal Party. Well, actually, there is no battle, but the PM’s announcement today does mean Peter Costello is going to have to decide what he wants to do.

I’m not going to endlessly glean the permutations of a challenge versus quitting versus staying put; suffice it to say that whatever course he takes he is going to look like the beaten, second-rater that many already believe him to be (short of an unlikely victory, of course).

So really, for reasons of self-esteem, he needs to mount a challenge, to at least have a go. A noble loss after a doomed tilt followed by a quick retirement might be his best option.

Elsewhere: saint has some extensive commentary.

Saturday Salon

An open thread where you can, at your weekend leisure, discuss whatever you like.

Email Problems

Folks, my apologies if you’ve sent mail to my gmail address and I haven’t responded. I’ve just checked it and realised that I’d entered my old bigpond address in the forwarding settings so the email hasn’t been getting to me. I’ve now had a chance to have a quick look at the backlog of gmail but I won’t be in a position to reply properly til sometime over the weekend - I have a meeting this afternoon and a friend coming round for dinner and a drink tonight so I’m unlikely to be at my computer for a bit.

Anyway, the gmail address is now properly configured so this problem won’t arise in the future.

Joh Blogging, Culturally Of Course

Andrew Bartlett has written an excellent post on the cultural climate of the Joh era in Brisbane and its continuing legacy. It’s very interesting to observe that a climate of harsh repression and boredom stimulated so much culture and creativity burbling up below the surface. There’s a Foucauldian point here - power and resistance are intimately entwined. Paradoxically when Goss came to power, and the arts became the recipients of state patronage, a lot of the edginess and excitement of the Brisvegas scene disappeared, though there’s still a lot of very interesting cultural work being done. A friend of mine who’s a few years younger than me bemoaned the fact that she heard about all sorts of stuff when she was a teenager, but when she reached legal drinking age most of it had been shut down or sanitised. As I noted at m c gregg’s place, Andrew Stafford’s excellent book Pig City, which Andrew also mentions, is a fabulous politico-cultural history of the Joh years. Interestingly, in light of the point I’m making, Andrew’s book also kind of peters out after the early 90s. Another way to recapture the unique feel of the Joh years, which I’ve written about before, is through literature - Andrew McGahan’s Last Drinks has the added benefit of giving rise to some fascinating reflections on memory, nostalgia, forgetting and mourning. Andrew’s time as a Queensland Uni Arts student just overlapped with mine - I didn’t know him but we had people such as John Birmingham in common. The mid-80s in Brisbane (it wasn’t suffixated as Brisvegas until a bit later) was the time I first engaged with politics, and culture, and sex, and what passed for adult life in those years. So, because of the heady feelings thinking back to those years inspire in me, heightened by Joh’s death, I’m still not quite ready to revisit the memories of that time. Every death has its own meaning, and its own effects on others, and I’m quite surprised by what Joh’s death has made me feel. The ghosts of that past are still with me, it seems.

In the meantime, here are some memories that sprang to mind when Joh turned 94:

Time to revisit the Dispatches from Johburg and share some random memories of my teenage years under the reign of Bjelke:

- as a young public service clerk, going up to the third floor of the Treasury Building with some friends and sitting in Russ Hinze’s enormous leather chair and drinking his scotch

- coming home every night during the Seqeb strike and reading by candlelight

- smoking dope on the dance floor of the unlicensed club downstairs on Elizabeth Street in the middle of town that was open twenty four hours

- being taken by my boss to the gambling joint over the road from the Gabba Dogs and discovering that the scotch and sandwiches and cab fare were free and that uniformed cops would come in to throw out people who complained the games were rigged

- the Joh for PM sticker that came free with the Saturday Courier-Mail one week

- watching Big Russ on tv declare “there are no illegal casinos or brothels in Brisbane - Terry Lewis drove me round the Valley last night and showed me where they weren’t”

- watching the cops arrest a priest in vestments and a one-legged woman on crutches and them being bundled into the back of a paddywaggon at a protest at Victoria Park

- the pile of stat decs for underage patrons at the ZZZ club in Roma Street where me and my mod suited friends used to go and listen to ska bands

- hearing on the radio in a Yellow Cab (typical cabbie opening line - “what do you think about that Joh, mate? lots of cranes on the skyline”) that Joh had resigned and the incredibly violent storm felt absolutely right

- the feeling of freedom that you’d get driving over the NSW border

- how nothing ever happened on Sundays and the buses stopped at 5pm

It’s funny how many memories of the Joh Era seem to be night time ones. But it was that sort of time. Pleasures were secret and hidden, and protesting was too hard sometimes in a sweaty Brisbane summer. Much easier to drink beer on the back deck. You can get a sense of the feel of the Joh years in Andrew McGahan’s excellent novel Last Drinks and Venero Armanno’s Firehead…

On a different note: There’s a guest post by another Queenslander on the politics of Johdom at Barista. Rob Corr puts Joh in his place very succinctly.

In other Joh-related news: The mooted picket of his funeral has been called off.

Worth a visit: The Queensland College of Art has an exhibition of 70s/80s political posters at its Southbank gallery.

Elsewhere: Michael talks about his memories of Joh over at Poustinia.

Against Economic Theories of Democracy

One of the most fascinating aspects of the UK election is the role of the Liberal Democrats - something that I think has received no coverage in the Australian media, but has been discussed in the blogosphere.

The Lib Dems face an interesting strategic challenge in this election - squeezed by a first past the post electoral system, they have to be competitive against both Tories and Labour. Their voting demographic is similar to the Tories’, and their support largely regional and suburban, but they also can’t afford to be seen as too close to an unpopular Prime Minister. To some degree their chances of taking more than the 53 seats they hold (leaving aside a recent Labour defector, who’s not recontesting his seat) are very much a prisoner of the Tory vote. If the Tories do well, they take seats of the Lib Dems, and conversely the Lib Dems are in second place in many marginal Tory constituencies. With the polls showing the Tory vote stuck at 33%, and Labour set to have a a majority of 130 odd MPs, observers argue that the Lib Dems’ real chance is in 2009.

I’ve been doing a bit of reading about the Lib Dems. One interesting observation from a couple of political scientists who’ve published a comprehensive monograph on the party - Neither Left nor Right: The Liberal Democrats and the Electorate - is that Downsian economic theories of democracy which see voting and party positioning as akin to a market are completely inapplicable to the Lib Dems. Rather than moving to the centre, as the model predicts, they’ve enjoyed much more success since abandoning the tactic of “equidistance” after the 1992 election, and staking out their own territory. In fact the Lib Dems have enjoyed most success by pushing for an increase in taxes, and for hypothecated taxes dedicated to education. So rather than occupying a political space to Labour’s left, or between Labour and the Tories, they’ve tried to stake out a position as radicals who are “neither Left nor Right”.

Perhaps more evidence that passionate politics helps centrist parties?

Elsewhere: The Guardian has comprehensive coverage of the Lib Dems’ campaign, strategy and policies and a handy map [link to .pdf] of Tory and Lib Dem target seats, with margins.

Just in: Tim D provides a poetic perspective on the Lib Dems.

Flying Daleks?

The new series of Dr Who starts on the ABC on Saturday the 21st of May at 7.30pm. Looks good - but what’s with Daleks that can fly?

Opinions solicited

When I changed over to broadband, my email address changed and thus my feline gravatar disappeared. What should I use as a new gravatar?

Incidentally, I was reading a book about the UK Lib Dems last night and noted that their logo is the bird of freedom. Very cs-ian!

All The News That’s Fit to Blog

Via Corporate Engagement, this RN programme should be interesting:

Tune in to Radio National’s Media Report in Australia tomorrow (28/04/05) at 8.30am or 8pm for this:

All the News that’s fit to Blog
28 April 2005

Blogging is having a big impact on American journalism - with bloggers using their posts both to leak to the media and to challenge it directly. Dan Rather, the iconic CBS News anchor who retired last month, is the bloggers’ biggest scalp to date. But what impact is blogging having in the Australian media? Jason Di Rosso has our special report.

I spoke to the journo, Jason Di Rosso, on the phone a while back and I think the programme might be worth a listen.

Update: Courtesy of Glen, there’s a transcript here. More at Catallaxy.

“Formal Cooperation in Evil”

The quote of course is from Cardinal Ratzinger.

The stakes for the Bali 9 have just been raised - Indonesian police intend to press for the death penalty in all cases. This really raises legitimate questions about the continued co-operation of the AFP with the Indonesian authorities.

Former Labor Justice Minister and current backbench MP, Duncan Kerr made some good points on Lateline last night:

I’m not going to make a criticism of the way the Federal Police have handled this, because they obviously need to have effective working relationships with the Indonesian authorities. What I am critical of is what seems to me to be a falling away of our commitment to treating seriously Australia’s opposition to the death penalty. And we have to balance our very real security and law enforcement concerns and the way we deal with Indonesia and all other countries with a real commitment to the national policy that’s implemented in our legislation, both with respect to extradition and mutual assistance.

So, what troubles me is that in all of the discussion, the consequences don’t seem to be fully put on the table. We aren’t putting into our law enforcement discussion the consideration that we have to take into account the fact that the death penalty may well be the ultimate outcome of particular operations, and it may be that there are more effective ways consistent with law enforcement co-operation with other countries that avoids that outcome. In order to avoid the outcome, the Federal Police should have behaved differently in the case? What troubles me is it seems to me we are walking away from the fundamental commitment that the Australian Government has operated on for several decades, which means that, for example, if a country requests our assistance with extradition, extradition is refused unless either the death penalty does not exist or, if it does exist, we get an undertaking it will not be implemented.

Given that Australia’s policy of opposition to the death penalty is embodied in legislation, we need to hear some convincing answers from the Government and the AFP.

It’ll also be interesting to see whether proponents of the “Culture of Life” take up this cause, and emulate Cardinal Pell in his concern.

Elsewhere: Discussion of the death penalty here at LP, at Rob’s place, Catallaxy, wsacaucus.org and Sailing Close to the Wind. Andrew Bartlett has a powerful post on the death penalty.

More discussion of the Schapelle Corby case at Troppo. And Currency raises some questions as well.

Labor Day

Unlike some states, in Queensland Labor Day is commemorated by a public holiday close to the 1st of May. I’ll be marching on Monday with the local branch of the NTEU. Come and say hello if you’re an LP reader and get to the booze-up afterwards. The big question I have in light of recent controversies here is - what beer should I drink?

History Wars Continued and Continued

Gerard Henderson never gives up. The perpetual History Wars roll on, with this week’s entry being a spray about the alleged support of the Left for communism in Vietnam and Cambodia, accompanied by the usual conspicuous indignation tactic of demanding that people apologise. I’m no longer interested in refuting Gerry on a regular basis, and in any case Ken Parish has done a good job at Troppo.

But I did want to draw attention to Henderson’s most recent airing of one of his enduring obsessions - the Labor split:

Half a century ago, as Labor leader, Evatt should have been able to manage diversity. Instead, in a paranoid state, he fermented division. As a consequence, Labor was devastated at the federal level - and in Victoria and Queensland - for a generation. If the participants in the Melbourne seminar this week follow their published scripts, then Evatt’s predominant role in this Labor disaster will only be mentioned at the margin. It’s called denial.

Henderson is departing from his usual Culture War script - it’s a bit hard to see how his repeated justification of B.A. Santamaria and demonisation of Doc Evatt has any contemporary resonance. In this case, Henderson’s ire is inspired by a new book published by Scribe - The Great Labor Schism: a retrospective (the seminar he writes about coincided with the book’s launch in Melbourne). Henderson’s criticism is unsurprisingly quite misplaced and unfair, as the book (an edited collection) does not purport to be a comprehensive re-examination of the details of the Split. That is something that would be welcome, incidentally, and a great service to Australian historiography, since the existing account by Robert Murray is quite one-sided in its political assessment, as well as being quite dated (initially published in 1970). Rather the central thrust of The Great Labor Schism is to examine the impact of the Split, both human and political, and whether the Labor party has ever achieved “closure”. It’s pretty obvious that Henderson hasn’t.

I’ll write a full review of the book in due course. At the moment, I’m rather too busy with a number of work projects. However, I will says from the chapters I’ve dipped into so far, it’s well worth a look.

Whatever happened to Hitchens?

In case you’ve been wondering, here’s the headsup [via Tim D.] I used to really enjoy Hitchens’ acerbic and witty writing - but he’s descended into a sad self-parody. And lest I be accused of disliking him now that he’s joined the forces of evil, I think that it can easily be argued that his writing has become less punchy and his arguments confused. But maybe, as George Scialabba observes, there is an element of disappointment at his political switch:

If a hall of fame were established for contemporary book reviewers‚Äîwell, why not? There’s one for ad executives, poker players, and probably porn stars‚ÄîChristopher Hitchens would very likely be its second inductee. (James Wood, of course, would be the first.) About an amazing range of literary and political figures‚ÄîProust, Joyce, Borges, Byron, Bellow, Orhan Pamuk, Tom Paine, Trotsky, Churchill, Conor Cruise O’Brien, Israel Shahak, and a hundred others‚Äîhe has supplied the basic information, limned the relevant controversies, hazarded an original perception or two, and thrown out half a dozen fine phrases, causing between fifteen and forty- five minutes of reading time to pass entirely unnoticed. His very, very frequent political columns have occasionally seemed tossed off, it’s true; but his books about Cyprus, the Palestinians, the British monarchy, and the Elgin Marbles are seriously argued. Though he lives in Washington, DC, and is said to be very fond of fancy parties, he has famously insulted and called for the incarceration of a sitting President and a ubiquitously befriended diplomat and Nobel laureate. And he appears on all those self-important TV talk shows without wearing a tie. How can you not admire someone like that?

Actually, it’s not so difficult, I’ve discovered. All the someone in question has to do is begin thinking differently from me about a few important matters, and in no time I find that his qualities have subtly metamorphosed. His abundance of colorful anecdotes now looks like incessant and ingenious self-promotion. His marvelous copiousness and fluency strike me as mere mellifluous facility and mechanical prolixity. A prose style I thought deliciously suave and sinuous I now find preening and overelaborate. His fearless cheekiness has become truculent bravado; his namedropping has gone from endearing foible to excruciating tic; his extraordinary dialectical agility seems like resourceful and unscrupulous sophistry; his entertaining literary asides like garrulousness and vulgar display; his bracing contrariness, tiresome perversity. Strange, this alteration of perspective; and even stranger, it sometimes occurs to me that if he changed his opinions again and agreed with me, all his qualities would once more reverse polarity and appear in their original splendor. A very instructive experience, epistemologically speaking.

Lesbian Chic, LA Style

After recent discussion here at LP about sexuality and stereotyping in tv, I’m interested to see Rob Corr has a good post on an spray about The L Word.

Incidentally, can anyone think of an Australian tv series with a continuing character who’s a queer woman? Preferably one who doesn’t get killed or turn evil?

Elsewhere: More at David’s place.

More Junk Corporate Science

Looks like the “research” claiming that texting and emailing reduced iq was commissioned by and spun for HP in an attempt to sell stuff. [Phew, I’m relieved - back to my emails now]. Anyone surprised?