ARCHIVES 1997-2007  --- ARCHIVES 2007 +
JULY 2013


Kevin Rudd has again become leader of the Australian Labour Party.  Reactions are extreme.  The union gang who financed the original Rudd election did so out of stark necessity.  That was because John Howard had enacted "Work Choices" which would have been the death knell to unions in Australia.  The real power over wages in Australia has traditionally been with the state governments.  "Work Choices" changed that.  Within a few years, Unions would have become irrelevant.

However with Rudd taking power in the Federal sphere, the unions alienated voters in the states.  And then union outsider Rudd threatened Murdoch's "Bay Books" monopoly on local book publishing.  With the Murdoch Press antagonistic, and with Rudd's obnoxious presidential attitude to rule, his dethroning was a foregone conclusion.

The problem was the Union Cabinet was too strong for new Prime Minister Julia Gillard.  As a committee they overreached themselves.   The total of their activities have alienated the electorate as shown by plunging polls.  Against their better judgement, the union bosses cum cabinet have now committed hara-kiri and restored Rudd to power, apparently after having extracted a few concessions.

On another note.  There is a pien (aka chapter 36) in the Tao Te Ching which to my mind applies to the current actions of Murdoch:

What is in the end to be shrunk must first be stretched,
Whatever is to be weakened must begin by being made strong.
What is to be overthrown must begin by being set up.
He who would be a taker must begin as a giver.

and finishes:

It is best to leave the sharpest weapons where none can see them.


The developments in this case are frightening.

According to Al Jazeera and RT.COM, three Latin American nations have reportedly offered political asylum to Snowden.   European nations (France, Italy, Spain, Portugal) have been charged with rescinding the permission of the Bolivian Presidential Plane to travel through their airspace, citing as reason that Snowden was on the plane.

And the scary bit.  Snowden has not revealed anything on the international intelligence front that was new or unsuspected by the objectives of that spying.   All of their outrage is feigned and strictly for home consumption.  Of course knowing the extent is helpful, and some of the details of information exposed could be harmful on a local level.  So someone else benefits.  Who really cares?

The unforgivable thing that he has done is reveal the naughtiness of the NSA in spying on US citizens.   And the scary thing is that from the President down, everyone now appears to be "out to get" Snowden.

My conclusion is that the NSA has directed those people to stop Snowden at all costs.

Last month I wrote: 
Like J.E.Hoover is reputed to have done, they (NSA) may well already control the presidency and various other members of government.  While NSA or HS (or somebody within those agencies) might not already control various government personages, it is a catastrophe waiting to happen.

And later on that month I wrote:
~50% probability.  Snowden has got really damaging data and must be neutralised at all costs.

On the evidence, that 50% probability has shot up to 80% probability.


On Thursday 25th July Allan Jones helped launch a book "Give Us Back Our Country".  The launch was in the Parliamentary theatrette, courtesy of MLC Reverend Fred Nile.  I must say that my opinion of Fred Nile has risen considerably.

The thesis of the book's authors is that Australian Politicians are, to paraphrase, periodically (i.e. every three or four years) elected dictators.  They will promise anything to get into power, and once in power, happily go their own way.  Frequently that way is not well insulated from the appearance of corruption.  One instance cited was the employment politicians frequently took immediately after leaving office, often in industries that a few weeks earlier they had been regulating.

The authors defined "Micro Politics" and Macro Politics" respectively as the
legislation/regulation of citizen's behaviour that politicians engaged in, and the Australian Constitution that regulated Politician's behaviour.

There was an almost envious discussion of the Swiss system of direct democracy, and some mention of the US direct democracy (which actually exists only in some states, e.g. California.)  Venezuela (which has Presidential Recall) and Iceland were not mentioned.  The only way that was proposed to achieve that desirable end of direct democracy in Australia seemed to be that we in the theatrette should buy the book and form pressure groups in an attempt to persuade politicians to relinquish their power.

Could I suggest a tactic for achieving that end?

We should try to persuade some politician to open a "voting" website.  That politician could invite his/her constituents to advise on the way upcoming legislation should be voted upon.  I am sure that the concerns that might be raised, (security, transparency, privacy) can easily be met.  If any reader is dubious, please email me and I will publish how those concerns could be met.

I do think that if even one politician (especially a Senator or MLC) were to adopt that strategy, the moral pressure would provide a wedge that could cause the more rapid adoption of direct government principles.