Comments on: So what is this thing called 'neo-liberalism'?

By: Sukrit

Sukrit — Mon, 03 Aug 2009 09:13:18 +0000

The Australian people will never knowingly adopt socialism. But under the name of Liberalism, they will adopt every fragment of the socialist program until one day Australia will be a socialist nation without knowing how it happened.

By: Ambigulous

Ambigulous — Mon, 27 Apr 2009 12:26:20 +0000

Pilger is a propagandist, not a journalist.
In this he follows faithfully in the footsteps of Wilfred Burchett (who until the end proclaimed himself “independent” and a “rebel”). Both did some useful reporting.

I would put Pilger on a par with Noam Chomsky (whom some still regard as a “scholar”). Chomsky’s writings – outside linguistics – are characterised by quaint and blinkered misreadings on topics he knows but sparsely. He seems to operate from press clippings half-digested. No expert he. But idolised by many. As is Pilger. As was Burchett.

Pilger’s misbehaviour in Fleet Street many decdes ago was lampooned by “Private Eye” magazine. They noted the new verb: ‘to pilgerise’ [to exaggerate a story for emotional and political effect]. Come to think of it, Pilger’s a bit like Germaine Greer at her worst: unscrupulous and raucous.

epater les bourgeois is fair enough, but do it with style and substance ladies and gents!

By: Russell

Russell — Mon, 27 Apr 2009 12:09:14 +0000

Ginka – the Henson affair? marriage can only be between a man and a woman etc etc

By: Ginja

Ginja — Mon, 27 Apr 2009 11:50:56 +0000

Control freak, maybe (perhaps understandably) but what exactly is moralistic about Rudd? Aside from alcopops – which is really a public health issue – I’m racking my brains to undrstand what Rudd has been moralistic about.

It’s an impression people have about Rudd (mostly from being a churchgoer, I’d guess) but I don’t know what it’s based on when it comes to public policy.

By: Adrien

Adrien — Mon, 27 Apr 2009 04:33:54 +0000

The only problem is, Labor had lived up to its election promise – some support personnel would remain but combat troops would be pulled out. That was what Labor very clearly said it would do before the election. Argue against the policy by all means, but you can’t say Labor went back on an election promise. It didn’t. Facts are facts.
.
Pilger is something of a propagandist. He distorts or creatively interprets. His take on the representation of Vietnamese people in Hollywood movies comes to mind. He described such representation in Apocalypse Now and it was so fanciful as to appear completely fabricated. He seems to’ve missed the obvious point that most Hollywood movies treat the Vietnam War from the point of view of those opposed to it. It’s a shame. When he’s good he’s really good.
.
This is the kind of misinformation that makes people on our side of politics cynical – usually it’s based on twaddle.
.
Both sides of politics run on twaddle.
.
The sad thing is, if you were to ask people on the far Left who was more trustworthy – Rudd or Pilger? – Rudd wouldn’t even be in competition.
.
Well he wouldn’t. He’s not in the far Left is he? It’s easy to be trustworhy if you’re on the far Left. You never have to choose between to or more unacceptable options. In govt you must do this all the time.
.
I think Rudd is a moralistic control freak. And I’m a little mystified as to his buy-some-stuff grant. But he’s made a big effort to keep his promises. Methinks he’s trying to restore faith in the ALP after the contributions of the World’s Greatest Liar.
.
But how’s this for twaddle? Yesterday I got into a discussion viz the homebuyer’s grant. There was a guy who was lambasting Rudd for creating a housing bubble. True the grant did do that. But the dude totally forgot that it was Howard not Rudd who introduced it!
.
That’s party loyalty for ye. Have a card and fit the CRM-114 to your head. Permanently.

By: Ginja

Ginja — Mon, 27 Apr 2009 02:20:27 +0000

I was excepting The Age, of course. I think I’m right in saying The Age is the only large paper to publish pro-union editorials (I almost fell off my chair when I happened across one). I didn’t know that was legal anymore.

But for the rest of the country, it’s slim pickins’. Gittins is great, but I’d still hesitate to think of him as an unambiguous Leftie.

Murdoch employs the odd progressive type, but they ususally fit a pattern. They’re the kind that spends all their time fretting – the type that wants a toothless Left that never does anything.

Pilger?! Pilger?! When Pilger was on Q&A a while ago he got stuck into Labor over Iraq. Apparently Labor wasn’t living up to its election promise because it was only pulling combat troops out of Iraq. The only problem is, Labor had lived up to its election promise – some support personnel would remain but combat troops would be pulled out. That was what Labor very clearly said it would do before the election. Argue against the policy by all means, but you can’t say Labor went back on an election promise. It didn’t. Facts are facts.

This is the kind of misinformation that makes people on our side of politics cynical – usually it’s based on twaddle. The sad thing is, if you were to ask people on the far Left who was more trustworthy – Rudd or Pilger? – Rudd wouldn’t even be in competition.

By: Adrien

Adrien — Sun, 26 Apr 2009 06:36:08 +0000

Naah. Pilger’s only marginally better than Adams.
.
Mm don’t know about that. I’ve picked Pilger on distortions and outright propaganda. But when it comes to those he’s got in his sights I’ve never seen anyone wield so skillful an interview. He gigs like few in the trade still do.
.
But it’s a joke. Think about it. Rupert Murdoch paying cash to a guy whose business it is to excavate the skullduggery of people like Rupert Murdoch. N’uk.

By: Paulus

Paulus — Sun, 26 Apr 2009 06:36:03 +0000

“I’d wager that all economic policy is an elite project.”

Very true, Adrien.

And from conversations on economics I’ve had with taxi drivers over the years, I fervently wish that economic policy will always remain an elite project!

By: Paulus

Paulus — Sun, 26 Apr 2009 06:29:55 +0000

“Mark D, even if we could have a social democratic utopia, markets – or at least the private sector – would account for most of the economy – overwhelmingly so.”

Ginja, if Sweden counts as your definition of utopia, the public sector there takes and spends 48% of GDP (2007). And that’s only < 50% because of some market reform in recent years. My point being: the public sector in a “social democratic utopia” could easily account for the majority of the economy. Whether you think that would be a good thing or a bad thing is up to you.

“What I want to know is, why aren’t there any regular opinion columnists who are on the Left? I mean really on the Left, not just fashionably progressive-ish.”

Kenneth Davidson?
Ross Gittins? (Not necessarily pro-union, but certainly Keynesian.)

“Get Pilger back here and give him Philip Adam’s space in The Weekend Oz.”

Naah. Pilger’s only marginally better than Adams.

Syndicate Paul Krugman’s columns instead. Krugman’s the best left-wing opinionista I’ve ever seen, with a combination of firm views, clear writing, and very deep knowledge. Most opinionistas (left or right) have only the first of those attributes.

Quiggins would also be an excellent choice.

By: Adrien

Adrien — Sun, 26 Apr 2009 06:15:16 +0000

John Q – neoliberalism never successfully embedded itself in the way that postwar social democracy did.
.
I don’t think you’re thinking wide enough. The international system of trade and finance is largely a product of the open trade policies of those called neoliberals. One of the main priorities of that Christian Socialist Kevin Rudd is to preserve this. To write the rulebook of course. But to maintain it nevertheless. Like it or not certain neoliberal fundamentals are embedded in the system. Will HECS go away? Will comprehensive welfare come back?
.
Appreciate the cycle that never ends.
.
Despite some big successes, it remained an elite project imposed on a largely hostile (or at least unsupportive) public
.
I’d wager that all economic policy is an elite project. And the assertion that the public was entirely unsupportive seems to me spurious given the electoral success of various agents of neoliberalism which include the governments of the ALP in the 1980s, the Tories in the UK, the Republicans and then the Democrats in the US.
.
There were limits of course, there were distortions and there was grumbling but overall?
.
as a movement with any capacity for forward movement, neoliberalism is finished.
.
True. And they said that about the socialism of the Keynesian era and they were right. And when this cycle of neosocialism is finished because nothing endures whatever liberalism’s morphed into will be by then ready again. Cycle. Never. Ends.