Totalitarianism or Fascism? Only hindsight will tell
So, today the all the State Premiers (and Chief Ministers too) fell into line after being scared by an ASIO briefing. They've agreed to facilitate the new anti terrorism laws being pushed by the prime minister.
The PM calls them 'unusual' and the Australian Lawyers Alliance calls them 'totalitarian' and 'unAustralian'.
All I can say is that I don't agree with the first quote, agree with the second, but object to the third. As an unAustralian myself, I know that these laws are the antithesis of an unAustralian - because they belong squarely in the vision of John Howards Australia. They're not 'unusual' they're exactly what anyone in power who wants to control their population wants to have in place.
Howard was so reluctant to bring in this legislation that he didn't even want a sunset clause, he wanted them to last forever..... (ok, it was a bargaining ploy, but from his comments around this it seemed he didn't want them to end any time soon)
Today I've had the refrain from the song 'anything you can do I can do better..' running through my head. The leader of the Opposition is trying to play hard man and wants the legislation to include the ability of the police to close off suburbs and do their will (ok, the last bit of that sentence was inference, but really!!) The government says he's too late, as the legislation will contain this.
Since the current government came to power they've constantly tried to scare the population into allowing them to do what they want.. It's always the same refrain - fear of foreigners, fear of the opposition party, fear of fear...
The fear of foreigners is a big one - since the 1980s Howard has a reputation as a xenophobe now he can combine his racism with consolidating his power. Heady stuff.
There are a few things that I really need to say here:
1. ASIOs supposed reason for deporting the US peace activist Scott Parkin under the current law was that he was a terrorist threat as he was going to teach Australian activists how to roll marbles under the feet of police horses.. As true as a leak can be I suppose.. Mr Parkin claims they never asked him about this. The best conspiracy theory out there is that it was a favour to Halliburton as his peaceful demonstrations in the US are predominantly against Halliburton. Considering how much business Halliburton and its subsidiaries get from Australia anything is possible. The only thing that is sure about this is that this happened under the current laws and we'll never know the truth.
2. It seems Australians fear terror more than anything else. Not surprising considering the way the government and the media go into hysterics over this. My assumption is Howard loves this - they way he broke a confidence regarding the number of dead in the London bombing and broadcast his knowledge far and wide when the police in London were trying to keep the numbers confidential, shows the man is too caught up in the adrenaline of this stuff.
3. Even Gareth Evans feels obliged to try to dampen the hysteria down. He rarely comments on Australian politics anymore, but he made a statement trying to put the terrorism threat in perspective: http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200509/s1469709.htm It won't work of course, the maelstrom is a very convenient way of distracting the population (and the compliant and complacent media) from the issue over the governments' behaviour in the Senate when it forced the Telstra sale bill through, and the bill itself of course.
Let's not forget that the IR bill is coming through soon, a bill that pushes workers rights back to the level that workers had at the turn of last century... A bill that will remove job security, reduce the already limited power that workers' have to negotiate with employers and (he hopes) get rid of the unions. It seems that he believes that by freeing workers from the burden of having others set working conditions it will improve productivity. It seems the US hasn't had any productivity increases amongst those in minimum wage jobs in around 10 years - yet the have complete flexibility when it comes to their jobs - they have no rights at all.. The best result that any economist here can come up with is that it will create around 6,000 jobs. Swapping job security for the masses in return for 6,000 jobs smacks more of ideology than any sound rational economic planning... The consensus seems to be that it will increase corporate profits.
I quote from Mussolini:
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism, since it is the merger of state and corporate power."
Remind us of any country we know??
And then of course there's the voluntary student unionism legislation that will come out soon. Don't let anyone tell you that Howard hates unions - he doesn't. He likes unions that don't call themselves unions and represent people like corporations or doctors, he just doesn't like it when the masses are organised - particularly if they have the word 'union' in their name..
This government is not alone in trying to distract the population with irrelevancies. The UK government has been doing it for years - certainly it was first caught out in 2001..
But to return to the original diatribe. I read a disturbing piece on the consequences of the Prevention of Terrorism Act brought in by the British government 20 years ago in response to the IRA
http://www.newstatesman.com/People/200508080010 Britain has more checks and balances than here, and has a section of the populace that still thinks and cares about the rights of all its citizens.
We can look forward to far worse, and all good Australians won't care - until it happens to them and they find they can't talk about it as they can go to jail..
The PM calls them 'unusual' and the Australian Lawyers Alliance calls them 'totalitarian' and 'unAustralian'.
All I can say is that I don't agree with the first quote, agree with the second, but object to the third. As an unAustralian myself, I know that these laws are the antithesis of an unAustralian - because they belong squarely in the vision of John Howards Australia. They're not 'unusual' they're exactly what anyone in power who wants to control their population wants to have in place.
Howard was so reluctant to bring in this legislation that he didn't even want a sunset clause, he wanted them to last forever..... (ok, it was a bargaining ploy, but from his comments around this it seemed he didn't want them to end any time soon)
Today I've had the refrain from the song 'anything you can do I can do better..' running through my head. The leader of the Opposition is trying to play hard man and wants the legislation to include the ability of the police to close off suburbs and do their will (ok, the last bit of that sentence was inference, but really!!) The government says he's too late, as the legislation will contain this.
Since the current government came to power they've constantly tried to scare the population into allowing them to do what they want.. It's always the same refrain - fear of foreigners, fear of the opposition party, fear of fear...
The fear of foreigners is a big one - since the 1980s Howard has a reputation as a xenophobe now he can combine his racism with consolidating his power. Heady stuff.
There are a few things that I really need to say here:
1. ASIOs supposed reason for deporting the US peace activist Scott Parkin under the current law was that he was a terrorist threat as he was going to teach Australian activists how to roll marbles under the feet of police horses.. As true as a leak can be I suppose.. Mr Parkin claims they never asked him about this. The best conspiracy theory out there is that it was a favour to Halliburton as his peaceful demonstrations in the US are predominantly against Halliburton. Considering how much business Halliburton and its subsidiaries get from Australia anything is possible. The only thing that is sure about this is that this happened under the current laws and we'll never know the truth.
2. It seems Australians fear terror more than anything else. Not surprising considering the way the government and the media go into hysterics over this. My assumption is Howard loves this - they way he broke a confidence regarding the number of dead in the London bombing and broadcast his knowledge far and wide when the police in London were trying to keep the numbers confidential, shows the man is too caught up in the adrenaline of this stuff.
3. Even Gareth Evans feels obliged to try to dampen the hysteria down. He rarely comments on Australian politics anymore, but he made a statement trying to put the terrorism threat in perspective: http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200509/s1469709.htm It won't work of course, the maelstrom is a very convenient way of distracting the population (and the compliant and complacent media) from the issue over the governments' behaviour in the Senate when it forced the Telstra sale bill through, and the bill itself of course.
Let's not forget that the IR bill is coming through soon, a bill that pushes workers rights back to the level that workers had at the turn of last century... A bill that will remove job security, reduce the already limited power that workers' have to negotiate with employers and (he hopes) get rid of the unions. It seems that he believes that by freeing workers from the burden of having others set working conditions it will improve productivity. It seems the US hasn't had any productivity increases amongst those in minimum wage jobs in around 10 years - yet the have complete flexibility when it comes to their jobs - they have no rights at all.. The best result that any economist here can come up with is that it will create around 6,000 jobs. Swapping job security for the masses in return for 6,000 jobs smacks more of ideology than any sound rational economic planning... The consensus seems to be that it will increase corporate profits.
I quote from Mussolini:
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism, since it is the merger of state and corporate power."
Remind us of any country we know??
And then of course there's the voluntary student unionism legislation that will come out soon. Don't let anyone tell you that Howard hates unions - he doesn't. He likes unions that don't call themselves unions and represent people like corporations or doctors, he just doesn't like it when the masses are organised - particularly if they have the word 'union' in their name..
This government is not alone in trying to distract the population with irrelevancies. The UK government has been doing it for years - certainly it was first caught out in 2001..
But to return to the original diatribe. I read a disturbing piece on the consequences of the Prevention of Terrorism Act brought in by the British government 20 years ago in response to the IRA
http://www.newstatesman.com/People/200508080010 Britain has more checks and balances than here, and has a section of the populace that still thinks and cares about the rights of all its citizens.
We can look forward to far worse, and all good Australians won't care - until it happens to them and they find they can't talk about it as they can go to jail..
posted by UnAustralian at 9:39 pm
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home