Paul Keating hasn’t been reticent lately about letting people know what he thinks … though, perhaps he never was. PJK has been in the news decrying the artistic establishment for neglecting Geoffrey Tozer, pondering cities and dubbing Canberra “a great mistake”, musing on the evils of the media and News Limited, and now taking a pot shot at Peter Costello:
Mr Keating excoriated Mr Rudd’s ”goodie two shoes” approach and said there were surely better candidates. ”Kevin Rudd must have no respect for the Future Fund in appointing Peter Costello to it.
”The Future Fund is all about national savings, yet during Costello’s period as treasurer, national savings were so depleted … Costello was the debt-builder extraordinaire.
”When Peter Costello had the debt truck running around in 1996 it had $129 billion painted on its side. Had the truck kept pace with Costello’s profligacy it would have had $705 billion on its fiscal odometer.
”Costello was a policy bum of the first order who squandered 11 years of economic opportunity … His sole claim to a structural measure was the GST and that was introduced by [John] Howard over the top of him.”
Whatever you think of PJK’s other opinionating, it’s very hard not to agree with him on this. The cynic in me suspects that Kevin Rudd might be hoping one day for some sort of post-Prime Ministerial role on the world stage, and thus doing a bit of pre-emptive insulation from criticism. His “Australia of all the talents” thing certainly works as a political tactic – enabling him to appear bipartisan and above politics while being anything but – but I’d have thought some of his appointments could be described as mediocre, to put it charitably.
The argument against Costello’s appointment is not merely that he is mediocre and lazy, but that he is Costello. He never hesitated to kick the Labor Party when it was down, just for the sake if it, and now he gets a $90K sinecure, because Rudd wants to look statesman-like. And it is just a look, nothing more.
This appointment shows while Rudd is in the Labor Party, he is not of the Labor Party. Keating has become a crashing bore with his opinions on everything, but he is dead right on this one.
I think Keating is spot on here. doing it once might make Rudd look above the fray, but making a habit of it is just insulting to the ALP and the people who vote for it.
This appointment looks like leaving the vandals in charge of the Art Museum. Do you expect anything to be left when you get back?
I think Malcolm would make a better Labor Prime Minister than Rudd.
Bring on Julia!
If I was Ban Ki-moon I would be watching my back. Rudd wants to be seen as the totally top banana.
The PM’s job is just a step on the way to world domination.
Huggy
Of course it’s pure politics on Rudd’s part – everything always is.
Keating’s right about Canberra, but not for the reasons he thinks. I live there and like it. Visiting pollies are twisted denizens of the parliamentary triangle and really have no idea of Canberra’s lifestyle (it’s a superb place to bring up kids, for a start). I suppose it’s fair to say it’s a nice place to live but you wouldn’t want to visit; the exact reverse of his beloved Sydney.
Keating is definitely spot on on the Costello appointment. K.rudd should be ashamed of himself. Bipartisanship is one thing, behaving like one of Ratty’s pack-hounds is another thing entirely. it’s disgraceful. Time for the Caucus to sack K.rudd and put in Julia, even if on industrial relations and ABCC, and her dog-whistling over asylum seekers she has indubitably been tainted.
I understand that Rudd has a gig of one of two PMs as gofers for the Danish PM on the Copenhagen climate talks. A role he would relish.
I agree with Sam the Rudd is in but not of the ALP. Keating is always worth listening too and hearing him sticking it to “them” is apt to bring a tear to these old eyes.
Impact on Oz finances: Nil
Impact on ALP supporters: Pissed off, but they’ll live and they will still vote ALP.
Impact on LNP supporters: Nil – too depressed to care.
Impact on swinging vote: Taking note that the only thing they liked about the LNP has now been absorbed by the ALP.
As usual, Rudd’s politics are faultless.
Canberra is dull, drab, lifeless, tepid, grey, beige. Civic is death itself and the suburbs are hideous. There is no culture, by which I mean not the absence of the arts (not that there is a lot if that) but there is no soul to the place.
Great place to bring up kids? Really? Well the schools are good and the place is fairly crime free and there are a lot of outdoor recreational things to do. But Canberra is not life in any meaningful sense.
I just saw Costello outside Flinders Street station. On his mobile phone. Didn’t look too perturbed.
The Rudd Machine is busy demonstrating to the electorate the abysmal lack of loyalty, principle, commitment etc of members of the Liberal Party.
None of the appointments is seriously important, they are just throw-aways for effect, out there in voterland.
How many so far? Tim Fisher, Bruce Baird, Alex Downer, Tip Costello, Brendan Nelson…. This is hilarious, and great fodder for the next election campaign.
(Incidentally, MacKerras has predicted today a double dissolution on 24 July next year. Kevin 24/7. Lovely.)
Keating blowing his stack is pure entertainment and water off Rudd’s back.
1. The populace in general hate Paul Keating.
2. Anything that Paul Keating says is automatically discounted because of 1.
3. Nobody ever lost any votes by pissing off PK.
Rudd knows this and would therefore be far from displeased about this mornings headlines.
I would agree that Costello and the bevy of ex-libs appointed to plum roles is a very shrewd political move on Rudd’s part, and also one that is clearly not merit-based. However, what I would question is if these decisions have ever been made differently.
Firstly, we only hear about the appointments where the applicant is famous, neglecting the less sensational appointments based on merit (a 25 year PS veteran is hardly exciting). Secondly, I suspect this was ever the way, except ironically Howard also also rewarded ex-libs and cronies, and fewer ex-labor pollies.
Just one more thing that convinces me that rudd is a dud. I voted for this mealy mouthed little twerp and almost every day now brings another disappointment.I am a Labor voter but if this twit leads the Labor party to the next election I will be voting for the Greens.
sr@12: “The populace in general hate Paul Keating.”
Prove it.
Joe has already got the great counter arguement, the reason for all the Liberal appointments is due to lack of talent and competance in the ALP.
This could be Rudd’s achillies heel.
patrickg@13: “…except ironically Howard also also rewarded ex-libs and cronies, and fewer ex-labor pollies.”
I can’t remember Howard ‘rewarding’ any ex-labor pollies, any at all. It would have been totally out of character for him. Happy to stand corrected….
Nor can I. Howard’s appointments were either partisan and/or provocative.
Yes, its a clear break from teh partisan politics of Keqting & Howard – back to consensus style of Hawke. Part of a wider trend that commentators like Megalogenis have noted.
That said – it was a mistake and Keating’s right, particularly on one thing: it will limit the govts ability to bash the Libs economic record. Its grossly overrated treasurer will now be off-limits.
I actually think its the only truly stupid move Rudd has made since he became PM.
Rudd has bought off Costello. The greatest parliamentary threat to the Rudd govt has been neutralised.
Keating can rant all he likes, sr @ 12 is spot on, nobody is going to care.
Keating is only cracking a major sad coz Costello was a far more able treasurer than he. Nobody will ever be stupid enough to give Keating a job handling money. This simple fact, combined with seeing people he loathes (ie Costello) given such jobs/credibility, drives Keating up the wall.
What’ll drive him even further up the wall is if Rudd becomes a more successful PM than Keating was (ie, wins more terms)
If Howard made just one Labor appointment in the entire 11+ years of his rule I will eat my hat with a side serving of humble pie.
Keating’s right about this appointment as he is with his criticism of News (very) Ltd.
More intrigued to find out how the faction bosses deal with this.
By which permutation of the numbers does Rudd stay in charge and will he be risking losing some support by these actions?
I’d accept that he can throw his “one person leadership” decisions out there and others will tolerate them as long as he carries the good poll results.
Clever politics so far by Rudd as many mention but on the contrary side as others point out he doesn’t really seem to be made from the culture and history of the ALP.
GW@15
sr@12: “The populace in general hate Paul Keating.”
Prove it.
The 1996 election?
Don’t get me wrong – I like the man, but I don’t detect any groundswell of support for Keating since then, and I suspect his forays into public life since 1996 have only served to reinforce the feeling (not held by me) that Keating is arrogant and out of touch.
I campaigned for Keating back then and the rage felt by many people was frightening, especially when your knocking on their door.
Jobs for losers!
This deal was sorted out quite a long time ago and eliminates the main rival to Rudd.
Costello was too scared to enter private enterprise where he would actually be judged by the amount of money he would make. That is, if any company would have been game enough to take him on. This way he gets to remain on the public teat and Kev is left with no serious rival from the Liberals for quite some time to come.
Tssk@16 Hockey would be wise to stay away from issues around “talent and competance” because it would just draw attention to his own failings and that of the opposition in general.
Keating loathed? Mostly by the rank and file in my experience and especially by those who correctly identified his economic policies as the leading edge of neo-liberalism. One of the reasons that the ACTU has become an insignificant rump movement is because of the ALP/ACTU accord which promised to deliver a “social wage” in return for wage restraint. None of the accords ‘mark whatever’ ever did. The unions compromised their core capacity to protect and advance members’ interests. Membership plummeted and has not recovered.
Boris Frankel provides a neat potted history in ‘When the boat comes in: transforming Australia in the age of globalisation’ at pg 208 available for perusal at http://books.google.com.au/books
In time Keating the renaissance peacock will be seen in proper light as a neo-lib tuurkey.
Yes John Howard used political appointments as a sop to venality. Should Labor maintain such an approach?
I also think that the appointment of Costello ill-becomes the government and, given both Mr Costello’s reputation within the Labor Party and its supporters as well as his consistently shocking poll performances as a prospective alternative leader of the Liberal party, constitutes a vote of confidence that can only be said to be the shared view of a small minority of Australians.
One would have presumed [mistakenly obviously] that the overriding criterion for the appointment to the job is that the person appointed is qualified and would be more, or at least equally competent, than all other potential applicants.
Otherwise it would be a poor decision.
And I don’t see too many jobs at all that I would consider Costello as the right person to fill.
Nurse’s assistant [if he could lose the smirk]?
Garbologist’s assistant [although he hardly seems to be energetic enough]?
Hardly suitable for receptionist is he?
Maybe a porter type job? He has shown some aptitude for following behind appearing to do gofer work for others.
Really it is hard to think of anything that he could do well.
Trainee proctologist? Torturer’s assistant? The infamous pox-doctor’s clerk?
Cheer up, people, at least it’s one less long-term unemployed person
.
Now if Rudd wanted to be mean, he could forthwith reorganise the acoounts a bit and use the Future Fund to offset the government’s (rather modest) debt. Just to see the look on Costello’s face. And it would have the welcome side effect of pissing off the bond traders.
sr@23: “The 1996 election?”
Come on, sr, that was over 12 years ago now. Your axiom, “The population in general hate Keating”, is in the present tense – and might not be true any more.
My guess is that people are now rather entertained by Keating. He never fails to fascinate the jaded media hacks. Just one drop of his soundbite acid is worth an entire week of pallid management-speak from the current crop of pollies, whether you agree with him or not.
Yes, I remember how much some voters professed to hate him back in 96, but I also remember how the Murdoch Empire orchestrated the entire “arrogance” meme on behalf of the Liberal Party.
Time passes…
Yes, “Time passes”…..
And we have reminders of his fine work even today….mandatory detention for asylum seekers and the sale of the Commonwealth Bank.
“how the Murdoch Empire orchestrated the entire “arrogance” meme on behalf of the Liberal Party.” Oh please…
Didn’t Keating have as his slogan “Leadership” and didn’t the ALP run the line in one of the campaign ads “Can you really imagine little Johhny Howard being Prime Minister?” Somehow I don’t think the “meme” was a hard one to run. It would only have been believed if it fed into a suspicion already held by the electorate.
I can’t remember Howard ‘rewarding’ any ex-labor pollies, any at all. It would have been totally out of character for him. Happy to stand corrected….
By fewer I effectively meant none, however I was only 15 in 1996 and needless to say my interest in politics was not as developed as currently, and I didn’t feel comfortable making a blanket statement.
This said, no one has addressed my other questions: 1. How representative is Costello’s appointment? and 2. How representative are these appointments of a new, dodgier way of appointing? (my hunch is that there has always been a significant minority of shitty, political appointments, but I really don’t know and would love anyone with better knowledge to comment)..
I’d love to see PK and KRudd go at each other… no holds barred, as if they were yelling at each other in parliament.
(I reckon PK would be very entertaining, with both left and right audiences enjoying the barbs into our current PM who’d probably just use lots of four letter words)
Anthony at #26.
Nice summary.
That was the era when I realized I could no longer support the ALP and when unions lost sight of their essential values.
I remember when my wife [the workplace union rep] came home and said “I voted against the union today.”
“Why?” I asked, and she told me.
Sad times.
Jenny @ 8 and Grace @ 11 – spot on. It’s astonishing how our supposedly nerdy little PM just keeps on rolling! He seems more than one move ahead in the game all the time. Just imagine the MSM comment if he had rewarded ALP faction favorites for these jobs in the usual way! Instead he’s having fun depleting the Coalition of all its potential elder statesman who might otherwise have been all too available to support the Liberal party rump.
The left were reasonably accepting of the Bruce Baird appointment; after all he stood up to Howard on asylum seekers, and the Nelson appointment…well that neatly balanced Kim taking off to Washington.
Keating sometimes disappoints, only rarely, mind! One would have hoped he would appreciate Rudd’s gamesmanship on the Costello appointment, but I guess he has enormous ego issues over Costello stealing what should have been his thunder during all those years of boom.
And yes there are Keating haters around just as there are still quite a few die-hard Howard huggers, so it has to say something about Rudd that he attracts all this personal invective! Judging by the quality of comment from those who loathe him I am happy to be among his supporters, even given the now often expressed criticism by many of them.
And for those who are somewhat bemused and disappointed by this appointment and his less than ideal policies on the environment and refugees why not admit the complexity of these issues and give it time to see outcomes. Already and even with a comparatively small target, ie a very mild and pro-business ETS, the Coalition are tearing themselves apart and on the verge of a real split. Similarly they have nowhere to go on refugees and border control now but a very explicit return to their disgraceful and discredited policies of the past.
Sir Henry Casingbroke mentioned the Therese Rein interview on Saturday and I echo his respectful opinion of her. She confirmed my opinion of her Kevin as an honest man working to achieve the best possible outcomes for the country. Couple that with his obvious intellect and proven track record of achieving an almost miraculous cohesion in the ALP, forging a very effective government during a world shattering crisis. Surely that must give one hope that our expectations in voting for him will not be disappointed.
Still the best PM this country has had.
I think many are little dewey-eyed when it comes to Keating. His commentary is starting to cross the line from good entertainment value to bitterness and jealousy.
Accusing Rudd of “disloyalty”, to Labor, is further than he has been before and it sounds mighty like he has just been caught in the act of doing just that, himself.
Mate that’s not a line, that’s a Venn diagram. A wide, encompassing, overlapping one.
Heh. Not really, joe2, not by a long way.
That’s one fantastic letter.
There’s two kinds of people, Fine.
After that letter was published we were discussing it at work, and we divided into camps of “if I received that from Paul Keating I’d never show my face again” and “if I received that from Paul Keating I’d have it framed”.
Speaking for myself, if Paul Keating wrote a letter like that to me, you could let me die happy, knowing that I’d achieved everything possible in life.
Costello the greatest parliamentary threat to the Rudd govt (before he neutered himself)?
Whatever wit and cut and thrust Costello displayed in parliament later he learned it from the master, PJK who used Costello as a toerag. It was good for a laugh but there were days when one felt genuinely sorry for $weetie, with his pathetic loser’s smirk. He was hapless.
Opinion polls have always told the Liberal Party that the Smirker had a preferred PM rating around 11-17 per cent. Howard was being pragmatic not to invite $weetie to step up to the plate: had he anointed him, the Libs would be meeting in a telephone box today. Liberal Party supporters should thank the nice Mr Howard for rescuing the party from total annihilation.
Of course, Costello wanted to be asked because he had no bottle to go and try and take it himself.
Nevertheless, nobody wants a leader who is so monumentally weak. The revealed lack of spine now sealed his fate and $weetie knew it – from then on he was dead man walking. That is why he threw in the towel. Of course, he would have failed, either way. Had Costello led his party to the election, the defeat would have been even more catastrophic, going by what the polls were saying, and he would have had no alternative but to resign after the election, anyway.
Only people smoking North Queensland pituri plant on a regular basis could try and fiddle with history the way they fiddle with themselves.
I’d certainly have it framed.
Time for a new brew …Keating Bitter.
“Throw it down you f’ing clown”.
Liam, I thought Paul had been fairly measured, up until now, when it came to Rudd, at least publicly. Love that letter!
On a vaguely serious note – one of the big tasks looming for TFF is its’ response to the muted split in Telstra’s wholesale/retail divisions, and as a large shareholder, a very large shareholder, the TFF board will have an interesting problem on its hands. Support the split and devalue a big chunk of its share portfolio (not withstanding that no one with two brain cells to rub together would want wish to own & be responsible for Telstra’s very twentieth century technologies) or vote against it to protect the share price in short term? Wouldn’t you love to be a fly on the wall when that gets discussed, preferably just above Costello’s water glass…
Not bad, joe2. Keating Bitter could join Fascade’s other fine products, Fail Ale, I.P.A., and the rest.
Great letter, telling it exactly like it was – for him. Who leaked it though? If not him then hardly disloyal to Labor, since it was a private letter. I share his sentiments about what some in NSW Labor with the unions did to themselves and the state over privatisation.
I think Joe2′s right and that Keating’s comment on the Costello appointment, extending as it did to abuse of Rudd being a “goody two shoes”, does amount to disloyalty to the ALP. What other ALP luminaries have come out to support him or to criticise Rudd? He’s no fool and there’s method in his madness well beyond toadying and personal ambition beyond being PM. No doubt he’s across all MSM and other commentary on his every move.
Paul Howes may yet have something to add, I suppose. Or perhaps he won’t risk another dismissive slap. Not that in my book Howes is in Keating’s or Rudd’s league, or any league for that matter.
I’m assuming that Hamish Coffee@38 is saying that Paul Keating is the best PM we’ve had. Happy to agree but add – to date.
While amusing, the letter does not make a case either for Costa nor for privatisation. Here is a sound counter-argument to the flogging off of state assets.
Thanks Kevvie, but now I realise my place when it comes to any future public criticism of the government.
“The greatest parliamentary threat to the Rudd govt has been neutralised.”
In the two years from the election to his resignation, did Costello make any speeches in the House of Representatives, or ask any questions at Question Time? Did he make any contributions to any parliamentary committee?
I believe the answer is no, all round.
I don’t think there was a less visible member of the House. (Maybe Belinda Neal.)
Seriously, in what sense was Costello a partliamentary threat to the Rudd government?
Keating’s the chairman of Lazard Carnegie Wylie who are advising the NSW government on the electricity privatisation, and who no doubt wll earn a healthy success fee if it goes ahead. That’s as far as Keating’s interest in the matter goes.
He’d be happy to see Labor in NSW destroyed as long as he gets a few quid out of it. Alternatively, if he thinks that this is genuinely in NSW Labor’s best interests, the guy is completely delusional.
Either way, nothing Keating says on the matter is of any real importance. I don’t think Robbo would have been impressed by Keating’s self-serving rubbish.
Anyway, I suspect that Keating’s complaints about Costello are just as self-serving. Maybe the world’s greatest treasurer is cheesed off that the position wasn’t offered to someone more deserving, like himself.
John Brown was on ABC local this morning, and he complained that Howard sacked him from the SOCOG Board the day after the libs won the election, despite his qualifications for the position. Donald McDonald (a personal friend of JWH) replaced him — and McDonald had no interest in sport at all. Brown is unimpressed with Costello’s elevation, shall we say.
I’m also mystified, but I doubt that Rudd has made a mistake. No doubt some Machiavellian reason will emerge in due course.
billie@3 said “I think Malcolm would make a better Labor Prime Minister than Rudd.”
Billie – whether the Malcolm you mention is Turnbull or Fraser you are absolutely correct.
But Julia is happy enough with KRudd it seems, so is just as guilty.
Patricia WA, if criticising Rudd for insufficient Labor zeal makes you disloyal, brand me as well with the traitor’s mark. Privatisation, well, de gustibus non est disputandum, but giving elected Labor figures the public finger ought to be a requirement of Party membership.
And no letter is private if it’s CC’ed to the number and type of people listed at the bottom. He might as well have nailed it to the sliding glass doors at 377 Sussex St.
“Whatever you think of PJK’s other opinionating, it’s very hard not to agree with him on this.”
Too true Mark. Costello has some positives…but this is madness. An insult to many.
Good old Keating. I luv the guy. The passion.
N’
I hadn’t read that letter from PJK previously. Privatisation of accrued state assets is nothing short of selling off the assets of the citizens and always to be opposed.
However, the more interesting point here is the psychopathology of the author which literally drips off the page. The sense of individual ownership of labor policies and party history is so strong. The party, c’set moi, cries PJK. Yeah. Right mate.
Brendan Nelson diagnosed Malcolm Turnbull as having NPD (narcissistic personality disorder) amongst which grandiosity is a key diagnostic sign. There are others, of course, and Keating probably shows enough of them to qualify.
However, another mechanism of the personality disordered is ‘projective identification’ in which process the fragmented self of the disordered person attributes to others precisely those elements of the self that the disordered person cannot integrate without threatening the existence of the core sense of self. It takes the form, as in Keating’s letter, of awful denunciation of particular characteristics in the other. The other need not exhibit any of these characteristics at all. All the personality disordered person requires in order to projectively identify is to feel a degree of anger towards the person. The anger then turns to quite irrational rage as the disordered person literally dumps all of their unacceptable emotions on the other.
Read it again folks. He may just be revealing his own self loathing here.
“I think Malcolm would make a better Labor Prime Minister than Rudd.”
Yeah right. I suppose you base this on his policies on asylum seekers (just call me honest John), the ETS (what global warming), the GFC (tax cuts for the wealthy please), that’s when you can identify any of course. Not to mention his questionable behaviour re the fake e-mail.
Really that sort of statement that flies in the face of reality and is just another excuse to bash Rudd really gives me the shits. If that’s really what you think go vote Liberal.
OH Goddess, Goddess, Goddess @ 57, I think it’s time, don’t you? I could be wrong, but I think I’m not, so let’s roll:
When I gave you that man sacrifice I thought you would eat it, not wear it.
Do you really think psychiatric diagnosis should pass as commentary now? How boring. Let’s explain everything away with a label we are not even qualified to use with any confidence. Oh Goddess, I am so tired of seeing these diagnoses on this blog lately. It’s like we are all in one big therapy room with every changing shrinks. Personalities are now viewed through the lens of a rainbow selection of disorders. I do not believe, oh Queen of the Damned, that this should pass for serious commentary. Now stay your bolts, stay them. I do not come empty handed.
A poem on the dangers of disguises in Andalusia:
Sparks shooting from his eyes
and wearing a poppy on his head
he arises to announce the death of night.
when he crows he himself listens
to his call to prayer
then hurriedly beats his great wings
against his body.
It seems the king of Persia
gave him his crown
and Maria the Copt, sister of Moses,
hung the pendant around his neck.
He snitched the peacock’s dressiest coat
and to top it off
his strutting walk
he stole from a duck.
Al-As’ad Ibrahim ibn Billitah (11th century Toledo)
Appointing ex-MPs from both sides is good politics but surely the best appointments will generally be non-pols. So rather than criticise Rudd for appointing too many Libs, I’m going to choose to criticise him for being too MP-heavy in his appointments so far
And as for Malcolm Fraser, don’t get me started. Despite his late conversion to Liberalism, so easy to do when you’re not in power, those of us with longer memories remember what a mongrel he was when actually in power.
And what Casey said.
Meanwhile, the polls …
Casey: reading your text puts me in mind of the film ‘Withnail and I’ from the screenplay to which I now quote:
Withnail: I’ve some extremely distressing news.
Marwood: I don’t want to hear it. I don’t want to hear anything! Oh God, it’s a nightmare, I tell you, it’s a nightmare.
Withnail: We just ran out of wine. What are we gonna do about it?
Marwood: I don’t know, I don’t know. Oh God, I don’t feel good. Look, my thumbs have gone weird! I’m in the middle of a bloody overdose. Oh God. My heart’s beating like a fucked clock! I feel dreadful, I feel really dreadful!
Withnail: So do I, so does everybody. Look at my tongue; it’s wearing a yellow sock. Sit down for Christ’s sake, what’s the matter with you? Eat some sugar.
Otherwise there is a long left tradtion of psychodynamically informed critical analysis for which see the Frankfurt school especially Herbert Marcuse’s ‘One Dimensional Man’ and ‘Eros and Civilisation’ and latterly Axel Honneth on respect and recognition. Other key texts in this tradition include Therese Brennan’s ‘History After Lacan’ (that is the Therese Brennan cited by Justice Einfled FYI)or any number of feminist political theorists who take subjectivity seriously from Judith Butler through to Seyla Benhabib and Jessica Benjamin just to name a few. Cheers.
Yep. Rudd down. Surprise surprise. The swingers are swinging as always. However some stalwalts like me are wondering why we voted for Rudd over Howard when he’s doing the same thing as Howard only less convincingly over refugees.
Okay Goddess. I would point out this:
None of those movements you cite actually diagnosed individual persons from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-V). Which is what you were doing upthread. That should be kept in the bounds of a therapeutic setting and not be passed of as serious commentary IMO. Diagnosing Paul Keating on a blog is rather different to a feminist analysis of discourse using Lacan and Butler you know.
And just in general, once you label someone as ‘disordered’ that has the effect of shutting down discussion, rather than encouraging it. Because it infers illness.
Back to Paul Keating, he is anything but ill and trapped by the dictates of a fractured core self. His contributions to the nation in regards to Indigenous rights alone showed a kind of bravery and leadership that Rudd could well learn something from. If you ask me his drive to see Mabo enshrined in the law went a great deal of the way to losing him the election. That takes a kind of courage which involves moving out beyond the requirements of the fragmented ego to consider the collective good of the nation.
Or is he overachieving in a desperate attempt to win back his mother’s love? What would Marcuse say?
In other words Paul Keating is all grown up and not, as you suggest, the eternal child trapped in in an endless repetition of the terrible twos.
You cannot confine the complexity of a human being within the limitations of that kind of diagnosis. Especially a human being as complex as Paul Keating.
Brendan Nelson diagnosed Malcolm Turnbull as having NPD (narcissistic personality disorder) amongst which grandiosity is a key diagnostic sign.
Takes one to know one.
Casey: the subjectivity of those in public life is a genuine object of political consideration. If we ignore it then we abandon a very significant critical tool. The growing public conversation around the subjectivity of public figures is most often centred on those moments when they abandon one or the other of the ‘rules’ of discursive democracy including, but not limited to, respectful communication with others. I suggest that the florid vituperation of PJK’s letter exemplifies the abandonment of the sort of rules of rationality by which policy decisions are supposed to be taken. It implies that policy preferences might have been formed in the realms ‘where the wild things are’ rather than the broad light of day available outside the cave.
Democracy needs to be better served than this.
Undoubtedly Keating has made significant contributions to Australian public life. So did Clive Evatt. Why, however, would anyone ignore the flaws in the constitution of either? Moreover why would we ignore them when those flaws impact on significant policy choices or the capacity of elected representatives to behave rationally?
As to your suggestion that only some sort of white coated laboratory inhabiting trained specialist has the authority to apply DSM criteria – too late and mainly because, as Brennan points out along with Christopher Lasch, narcissism is the dominant pathology of the times. The concepts have achieved popular currency because they fit the bill.
“Takes one to know one.”
It does. Which kind of gives credence to the point that if you read closely what people say, as they launch off into intense verbal attacks, much is actually revealed about themselves.
But as a general point, diagnosis is best left to those properly qualified and that does not include the likes of the idiots including Dr Brendan.
Anthony Nolan @ 69,
Bert Evatt, surely?
Of course policy decisions are made where the wild things are. As I’ve noted once before, politicians are variously guided by self-interest, principle and passion. None of which are necessarily indicators of good democratic, or historically,good non-democratic decision making. But they sure provide plenty of room for spaces in politicians’ brains where the wild things – a phrase I applaud – can enter.
Example : Workchoices was based on principle and passion, but it was one of the things that lost the Libs the last Federal election.
Bert, of course.
I agree with you on the subjectivity of those in public life. Judith Brett for instance does a fine job but without resorting to specific medical diagnoses as you did. And do Lasch and Brennan label current living individuals with a medical diagnosis Ro? I am sure you would understand that your diagnosis would be actually defamatory right? There is a distinction between the kind of analysis of public figures you are advocating and the medical diagnosis you gave Paul Keating.
But, as an aside, if you were to make such an analysis, then narcissistic personality disorder, which you applied to Keating -as opposed to ‘narcissism’ or ‘narcissist’ as a descriptor – is more than a flaw wouldn’t you say?
Yes I am saying that only specialists trained in the area are qualified to make the call of a medical diagnosis, and then only within a therapeutic setting where they have observed the individual over a period of time. You just don’t have the medical qualifications to do it, as revealed by your enunciation that the former PM has a serious mental disorder on the basis of one letter. No qualified professional would ever make that call a)publicly or b)on the basis of a piece of writing alone.
I do not really dispute much else you are saying btw. Just that one cannot make such a call with great confidence, and that one needs to consider how making such a call in isolation does not really add much to public debate. It would be no different to diagnosing someone with cancer without examining them and without having the qualifications to do it, on the basis of a few signs you have seen from afar.
So just to sum up, the ‘narcissism of the times’ as the object of analysis is a very different thing to smearing someone’s reputation by diagnosing him as having a mental illness without any qualifications to do so.
Cheer up. It WILL get better.
“Which kind of gives credence to the point that if you read closely what people say, as they launch off into intense verbal attacks, much is actually revealed about themselves.”
Sometimes. Sometimes not. Sometimes intense verbal attacks are just strategic in politics, on blogs. They are done with great thought and are not part of the suite of maladaptions from the split off self that Ro is referring to.
First: NPD it is not a mental illness. It is a disorder. There is a difference between an illness and a disorder. I therefore did not suggest that PJK has a mental illness.
Second: read my text carefully before you suggest that it is actionable legally – I say “probably” rather than “does…qualify”.
Third, my comments were not an attempt to “smear” anyone’s character so much as fair comment in the light of the published letter.
I shall be much more circumspect in comment in the future and that will be with a view to not pricking the thin skins of those whose own self identification with public figures sees them leap to their defence by threatening defamation action against others of us who expect to be able to exercise robust freedom of speech without descending into personal vilifcation.
Finally, narcissism is the default subjectivity of modernity in my view. The conditions of modernity, especially under liberalism, create the material conditions in which partcular constructions of subjective identity are more likley to succeed than others. Other material conditions at other times created the social circumstances in which other forms of subjectivity, more inclined to collectivist thought and action, for example, thrived.
But hey, lets not worry about informed discussion any more, eh?
Now, now. I didn’t threaten you with anything and as you know, my skin ain’t that thin. I was just suggesting one ought be careful. Relax oh holy one. I am just pointing out there is a distinction to be made between a specific diagnosis of a disorder and the kind of analysis you are interested in advocating. Which I am also interested in. Well at least in the area of trauma and attachment theory. Given I am doing a thesis on the traumatics of history in recent Australian writing, that is. Well that is what I am supposed to be doing, supposedly. Generally I just hang about on this blog trying to worship you, when you will let me.
As an aside Ro, I presume you know that some are starting to regard some of these maladaptions you are describing as traumatic responses and more rightly to be located as elements of PSTD rather than these more traditional labels? I find that interesting.
Good. We have common ground. And yes, PTSD/complex PTSD/BPD are all one of a bundle in some respects. don’t know about NPD but it is plausible. And yes as well I view that subject (yr thesis) as highly fertile. Feel free to press ahead with yr findings so far.
Oh come we always had common ground oh glorious ray.
What do you think of my point that the kind of invective that Paul Keating unleashes from time to time could just as likely be performed as a strategic part of his politicking? In other words he knows exactly what he is doing and it is not the remnant of the traumatic nor a split of part of the self? I always found his tirades rather strategic in that they worked to achieve an objective and were not just rants of injudicious anger. This letter, for instance, would have been intended for public consumption IMO.
He has made me laugh in the past especially when his psychologically inspired attacks have been made in Parliament. His comment that Hewson “was a shiver looking for a spine up which to run” was deadly.
Ahem. However, democracy needs better than invective and bullying. Robust comment is OK but hectoring, intimidation and downright character assassination have no role to play. Can you not imagine that one of the reasons that decent people stay out of the party is because of the sort of private communication we have been discussing? Who would want to be on the end of routine comment like that? Invective may appear to the participants to be strategic but it is the sort of thing that has brought representative democracy to a low ebb in the minds of many. It appears to me that those in civil society often do a far better job at sustaining the civility element.
Well indeed Goddess. As you say. Who would want that?
Er, I suppose that man outfit I got you erases memory too then?
Well now, never mind, I need to go check my incantation ingredients and see what went wrong exactly. Regular worshipping duties will recommence once I fix this little glitch.
Umm, jeez case, I think maybe you might be mistaking me for someone else operating under a nom de blog. Not so actually but keep going as I guess I’ll get it sooner or later. I’ll be yr blog-goddess if it makes you happy.
Metta.
Well said casey on the little matter of not offering medical diagnoses when one hasn’t
a) met the subject, or
b) had much evidence,
c) likely at third hand in ay case.
You and anthony have made your peace. Good.
I was offended by Dr Freud’s ‘psychoanalysis’ of the deceased Leonardo da Vinci, for reasons as above. I thought it amateurish, virtually baseless, and possibly attention-seeking on Sigmund’s part.
Some might say I over-identified with, and hero-worshipped Leonardo. Be that as it may.
oh lol anthony. That makes this whole conversation rather funnier than it was. Can’t believe you waited till the last comment to tell me that you were not Goddess. And you thought I was quoting Andalusian poetry just cause I like it? It must have read like a scene straight out of Brecht. The reason I thought you were Goddess is that you share some interests, but in particular, because we once had a rather heated convo on her NPD enunciations on another blog long ago.
I think you will know her when you come across her.
Metta back.
Ambi I’ve never read that. I will go check it out.
adrian@61
My memory is long enough… I remember Ming the Merciless.
Yes, Fraser DID do some bastardry (certainly gaining power), and we’d all be much better off if he hadn’t toppled Whitlam, but his main failure was in not strangling his treasurer. Did I say he’d be good? No, merely less awful than KRudd in the same way that syphilis is less awful than having HIV/HCV and leprosy all at the same time. While Fraser may have been almost as much a power-grabber as KRudd, at least Fraser didn’t promise a lefty paradise and deliver a righty wet dream.
Hell, even Harold “All-the-way-with-LBJ” Holt would be more useful than the “All the way with BHP” of Rudd/Ferguson/Wong/etc/etc.
casey,
don’t take my word for nuffink, it was decades ago I read it. Good luck.
Dave: should Malcolm Fraser have strangled Dr Jim Cairns, or do you refer to Mr John Howard? (I understand Mr Howard held further positions after being Treasurer to Malcolm the Merciless, but never amounted to much.)
Dave, you lash out at Rudd in the most extreme manner, while pointing to the wonders of Malcolm Turnbull, on your blog, where you describe yourself as a “lefty”.
Have you been blind to his behaviour since grabbing the job? Is there a position that Mal has presented that is not influenced by the demands of big business or those jockying right wing loons within his party?
Phil Lynch?
As I recall, Sir Henry, Lynch was suspected (unjustly, as it happens) of being involved in tax evasion (“Bottom of the Harbour” schemes – sounds like something the Painters’ and Doctors’ Union would do, doesn’t it?) and fell on his sword, thus paving the way for Howard to become the second laziest Treasurer Australia’s ever had.