There’s still a nastiness from those who think themselves superior and to the left of social democrats. Twenty years since the fall of the Berlin Wall and they still can’t figure out if the likes of Soutphommasane are comrades in the Popular Front or Social Fascists.

“The right never learns from the select past they worship and the left think their chosen future will work for everyone.”

Aquamarine. Now that’s a nice colour in any spectrum, political or otherwise.

Yep, and the best place to see this Australian “sense of egalitarianism” is overseas, because then its clear, absent all the bullshit. Wherever Australians congregate in foreign lands, parlticularly in seriously dangerous situations, you see it, and so do others. It’s natural, its worthy of celebration, and its us.

One too many G&Ts I think.

In any event, I hope Soutphommasane sticks at it – it would be good if he could link up with Robert Manne and The Monthly group and really make it a social democratic mag. All the infrastructure exists for a thriving group of social democratic thinkers – The Monthly, Dissent Magazine, Fabian Society, Per Capita (and other think tanks), blogs like LP – things just need to be brought together.

Exactly my experience of the period. Well said.

As for Movember. I refuse on two grounds because i) it makes me look like a relo of Chopper and ii) ‘men’s health’ is a reactionary anti-feminist backlash for which see ‘Boutique Health’ monograph by T. Schofield.

The traditional left right dichotomy is such a problem I find. Its a false duality in many ways, and doesn’t acknowledge many differences on both sides. (EG Ron paul’s criticism of neo con politics was strong during the bush regime, as was Paul Craig Roberts’, yet both sides of that argument belong to right wing fucktards imo.) Its a one dimensional model of things that are more than one dimensional.

Have you seen those political compasses that find their way around the net?

They provide 2 dimensional political models. the left right divide on the x axis and the authoritarian libertarian one on the y axis.

Your comment has me thinking about the ‘elitist left’ in those terms.

It certainly seems that those “court philosopher’ opinions are coming from the authoritarian side of politics (right or left wing) and there is something about the way a position is defined that points to that libertarian/authoritarian continuum.

Left or Right, there is something about the way some people try to define issues that points to their level of authoritrianism. Its got something to do with how the debate is framed, and so I think in the cases where that “elitist” critism is applied to either side its more a reflection of the authoritarian/libertarian dynamic than the left/right one. The way public commentators frame their thoughts might be worth looking at in those terms, and perhaps a starting point would be whether their statements tend toward asking questions and offering different options, or providing simple answers and not acknowledging the benefits in opposing viewpoints.

I’d also tend to see the country love/patriotism vs nationalism dynamic in those terms too, more a reflection of power and control for its own sake than any particular ideology.

I reckon that 2 dimensional model of political thought could offer a lot to the political conversation/shouting match that takes place in Australia, and its to our detriment that we don’t use it.

http://larvatusprodeo.net/2009/09/19/tim-soutphommasane-ideology-and-narratives/