Let me reacquaint you with the facts of the case. The 13 year old was in the crowd. She said something stupid. It was not racially motivated, but a reference to facial hair. Adam Goodes, a large, fully grown man, pointed out the girl from the field, resulting in her being escorted by security guards and police to an interview room, where she was grilled for two hours. Two hours! Goodes later claimed “racism had a face… and it’s a 13 year old girl.” It emerged the 13 year old was from a disadvantaged background and had written to Goodes saying she did not know or understand that her taunt was a racist slur.
This is what crowds are reacting to. That a highly paid, elite sportsman, a fully grown man, could so shamelessly and intentionally vilify a 13 year old girl, over something she said in ignorance from the crowd, resulting in her being taken from her seat and interrogated, and then very publicly disgraced in the media. Adam Goodes made this a racist issue by drawing such overblown attention to a single comment from a misguided child, barely a teenager. With the AFL, media types, and a succession of others, subsequently falling over themselves in eagerness to condemn her racism, and then to reward Goodes for later cutting the hapless teenager some slack and saying it wasn’t actually her fault, it was society’s apparently.
Apparently Adam Goodes is now so distressed by the public verdict on his actions, and his feelings so badly hurt, he is needing a few days off training to come to recompose himself. I expect he knows how that 13 year old girl and her family felt now.
On hurt feelings and vilification (a last word on the Adam Goodes booing controversy)
This correspondent has had a fair bit to say on the Adam Goodes booing controversy, most of it self confessed satirical tosh designed to mock the do-gooders who would tell a stadium full of Australians how to behave, and would do well to take a crash course in Crowd Psychology 101 (Boethius recommends the AFL commission acquaint themselves with the classic 1896 work of Gustave le Bon on the psychology and sociology of crowds if for no other purpose, than to appreciate their own clientele and grasp why lecturing crowds on social niceties is not a clever move).
I acknowledge the very real risk that the punters have had about enough of this subject… However, on this occasion I want to make a very serious and sober contribution to the debate, and point to the reason why Adam Goodes is being vilified by football crowds around the nation. I am sure there are some minor elements who are jeering Goodes because he is a notorious stager for free kicks; some because he is a champion footballer (the opposition crowd often boos the other team’s better players); some because he is perceived to be a whinger; some of those booing Goodes probably are racists, and many are just the sheep adding their baa to the baa of the flock. These are minor reasons, reflecting minority motivations.
Over the last few days I have read just about every column inch written on this, and most of the comments contributed by ordinary readers in the various online forums also. I have listened to talkback radio at every opportunity, and heard caller after caller ringing in to have their say. The vast majority have a strong view on why Goodes is being booed and it is for none of the reasons above, and the media class and other assorted hand wringers (with a few honourable exceptions) just don’t get it, or don’t want to. An example is today’s Australian and the article by Chip le Grand, which is strongly supportive of Goodes, and which is then followed by a long comments section contributed by readers, almost every one of which is entirely negative, and almost all for the same reason… The way Adam Goodes treated a 13 year old girl two years ago. This tells us two things – one) how great is the disjunct between the ordinary football fan and the media class and other assorted hand wringers adding their pious voices in defence of Goodes, and two) the actual reason why the vast majority of fans are booing Adam Goodes.
Let me reacquaint you with the facts of the case. The 13 year old was in the crowd. She said something stupid. It was not racially motivated, but a reference to facial hair. Adam Goodes, a large, fully grown man, pointed out the girl from the field, resulting in her being escorted by security guards and police to an interview room, where she was grilled for two hours. Two hours! Goodes later claimed “racism had a face… and it’s a 13 year old girl.” It emerged the 13 year old was from a disadvantaged background and had written to Goodes saying she did not know or understand that her taunt was a racist slur.
This is what crowds are reacting to. That a highly paid, elite sportsman, a fully grown man, could so shamelessly and intentionally vilify a 13 year old girl, over something she said in ignorance from the crowd, resulting in her being taken from her seat and interrogated, and then very publicly disgraced in the media. Adam Goodes made this a racist issue by drawing such overblown attention to a single comment from a misguided child, barely a teenager. With the AFL, media types, and a succession of others, subsequently falling over themselves in eagerness to condemn her racism, and then to reward Goodes for later cutting the hapless teenager some slack and saying it wasn’t actually her fault, it was society’s apparently.
Apparently Adam Goodes is now so distressed by the public verdict on his actions, and his feelings so badly hurt, he is needing a few days off training to come to recompose himself. I expect he knows how that 13 year old girl and her family felt now.
Let me reacquaint you with the facts of the case. The 13 year old was in the crowd. She said something stupid. It was not racially motivated, but a reference to facial hair. Adam Goodes, a large, fully grown man, pointed out the girl from the field, resulting in her being escorted by security guards and police to an interview room, where she was grilled for two hours. Two hours! Goodes later claimed “racism had a face… and it’s a 13 year old girl.” It emerged the 13 year old was from a disadvantaged background and had written to Goodes saying she did not know or understand that her taunt was a racist slur.
This is what crowds are reacting to. That a highly paid, elite sportsman, a fully grown man, could so shamelessly and intentionally vilify a 13 year old girl, over something she said in ignorance from the crowd, resulting in her being taken from her seat and interrogated, and then very publicly disgraced in the media. Adam Goodes made this a racist issue by drawing such overblown attention to a single comment from a misguided child, barely a teenager. With the AFL, media types, and a succession of others, subsequently falling over themselves in eagerness to condemn her racism, and then to reward Goodes for later cutting the hapless teenager some slack and saying it wasn’t actually her fault, it was society’s apparently.
Apparently Adam Goodes is now so distressed by the public verdict on his actions, and his feelings so badly hurt, he is needing a few days off training to come to recompose himself. I expect he knows how that 13 year old girl and her family felt now.
The problem with quotas
The issue of parliamentary ‘quotas’ for women resurfaced over the weekend at the Australian Labor Party’s national conference.
The ALP, in what is being described as an “historic step”, has pledged to ensure that women hold 50 per cent of positions at “all levels of the party organisation” by 2025.
This call for female quotas in parliament and on company boards has been pressed persistently for over 20 years. Added to these calls for parliamentary and boardroom quotas in more recent years has been the push to allow female soldiers to serve in the front line of Australia’s military.
Advocates for quotas presume there is still deep seated sexism which prevents women from attaining high office. While this was true in the past, it no longer appears convincing. There are now women serving on the boards, and heading up some of Australia’s top companies. And only a couple of years ago Australia’s prime minister, governor general and attorney general were simultaneously women. The glass ceiling not only no longer exists, it has be smashed to smithereens.
Now, I regard myself as a fairly traditional male. And as a voter, I want the best political candidates to be available and to serve our nation, whether male or female. Likewise, in the companies in which I own shares, I want the best people running them. Of course, we all know that companies really only care about profits (I make this remark only partly in jest) – so to overlook women as candidates for top jobs would undermine the primary objective of the business and its self interest – not something that companies are generally in the business of doing.
And there’s the rub: Companies are in the business of making money for their shareholders.
Members of parliaments are in the business of representing their constituents.
The military is in the business of defending our nation.
It is appropriate and necessary to remove barriers to women (or any potential candidate for that matter) in serving in high office. To refuse to consider the best candidate is plain stupid, and is an exercise in futility.
But to enforce quotas risks changing the focus, and override the purpose of government, business and the military.
The purpose of the military, which ought to be to best defend our nation risks being usurped by someone’s ‘right’ to serve in a commando unit, or the need to provide gender balance, and I have heard people speak in such a way.
Likewise, the purposes of our parliamentary democracy and of businesses risk being usurped by other objectives. Our parliaments and businesses need to keep their focus on their primary objectives. That is why women should not be held back from service and offering their talents.
But the danger of quotas is that it places the need for a quota above the main purpose of our institutions, and turns women’s participation into a token and a commodity.
presume there is still deep seated sexism which prevents women from attaining high office. While this was true in the past, it no longer appears convincing. There are now women serving on the boards, and heading up some of Australia’s top companies. And only a couple of years ago Australia’s prime minister, governor general and attorney general were simultaneously women. The glass ceiling not only no longer exists, it has be smashed to smithereens.
Now, I regard myself as a fairly traditional male. And as a voter, I want the best political candidates to be available and to serve our nation, whether male or female. Likewise, in the companies in which I own shares, I want the best people running them. Of course, we all know that companies really only care about profits (I make this remark only partly in jest) – so to overlook women as candidates for top jobs would undermine the primary objective of the business and its self interest – not something that companies are generally in the business of doing.
And there’s the rub: Companies are in the business of making money for their shareholders.
Members of parliaments are in the business of representing their constituents.
The military is in the business of defending our nation.
It is appropriate and necessary to remove barriers to women (or any potential candidate for that matter) in serving in high office. To refuse to consider the best candidate is plain stupid, and is an exercise in futility.
But to enforce quotas risks changing the focus, and override the purpose of government, business and the military.
The purpose of the military, which ought to be to best defend our nation risks being usurped by someone’s ‘right’ to serve in a commando unit, or the need to provide gender balance, and I have heard people speak in such a way.
Likewise, the purposes of our parliamentary democracy and of businesses risk being usurped by other objectives. Our parliaments and businesses need to keep their focus on their primary objectives. That is why women should not be held back from service and offering their talents.
But the danger of quotas is that it places the need for a quota above the main purpose of our institutions, and turns women’s participation into a token and a commodity.
Adam Goodes, Braveheart.
So here’s my thoughts on the AFL in the light of the Adam Goodes, and now Lewis Jetta, spear throwing gesture controversy. And I think I get how things go now.
The Kevin Sheedy throat slitting episode was unseemly and outrageous – he got a big fine and deserved one.
Dustin Martin giving the jailhouse salute was bringing the game into disrepute. Fine the sucker big time, yeah.
Sam Mitchell’s injection jibe at the juiced up boys from Essendon, also deplorable, if not shocking, the sensitive types at AFL House were outraged.
Mark Murphy making a rude and possibly illegal gesture (‘the bird’). It just can’t be tolerated. The only issue to resolve was how much to slug the uncouth ignoramus in fines. Michael Gardiner’s handcuff gesture, Mark Williams choking taunt… It goes on…
But Goodes and Jetta treating the crowd like barramundi in a barramundi spearing contest – well that’s fine, it’s cultural you see, and they were antagonised by… wait for it… they were antagonised by the crowd booing. Booing! Hooting and jeering! I ask you, I demand, how can that be tolerated, at a football game? It’s just not on. A crowd behaving like, well… a crowd. Outrageous! This would never happen at… at… at a chess competition, or the lawn bowls, or the synchronised swimming… But I digress.
Boethius, being a delicate and sensitive type, has full sympathy with Goodes and Jetta. I am very proud of my own cultural heritage, rooted as it is in the venerable tradition of the pre-modern Celts, and that does also involve spears at certain points too, so I know about this. If I were an AFL footballer, I would hope the cultural sensitivity extended to Goodes and Jetta would be shown also to those of us who are proud of our Celtic traditions. This would even extend to me being pleased for an AFL official to nominate the crowd member who is to be ritually disemboweled in their seat upon celebration of each goal I score, in accordance with ancient Celtic tradition.
Oh, and I have a friend who belongs to an obscure tribe whereby the two chiefs (we can use the respective team captains in an AFL context) begin a sporting contest between their respective tribes by mutually masturbating each other as a sign of respect and friendship. Perhaps the AFL could consider that as an appropriate way to mark ‘cultural awareness round’ one day?
Boethius, being a delicate and sensitive type, has full sympathy with Goodes and Jetta. I am very proud of my own cultural heritage, rooted as it is in the venerable tradition of the pre-modern Celts, and that does also involve spears at certain points too, so I know about this. If I were an AFL footballer, I would hope the cultural sensitivity extended to Goodes and Jetta would be shown also to those of us who are proud of our Celtic traditions. This would even extend to me being pleased for an AFL official to nominate the crowd member who is to be ritually disemboweled in their seat upon celebration of each goal I score, in accordance with ancient Celtic tradition.
Oh, and I have a friend who belongs to an obscure tribe whereby the two chiefs (we can use the respective team captains in an AFL context) begin a sporting contest between their respective tribes by mutually masturbating each other as a sign of respect and friendship. Perhaps the AFL could consider that as an appropriate way to mark ‘cultural awareness round’ one day? The perils of tweeting and facebooking late at night
Australian Rugby League champion, Quade Cooper, has become embroiled in controversy following a “late-night expletive-laden tweet,” after Australia’s Rugby Championship win over Argentina on the weekend.
According to the ABC, hours after the game Cooper tweeted: “Invite me to you’re next team discussion then ask me how much I give a f*** about your team selection? Zero f***s given”.
One wonders what Quade Cooper’s expletive laden tirade was all about.
But that’s the problem with using social media late at night.
I, as well as many people know (from personal experience), that one cannot be too careful about tweeting or post on Facebook late at night, especially after a Shiraz or a G&T or two (or watching an episode of Q&A)!
What sounds ‘bold’ or ‘insightful’ at midnight, probably isn’t at 8 the next morning. Especially if you’re talking about your boss…
But that’s the problem with using social media late at night.
I, as well as many people know (from personal experience), that one cannot be too careful about tweeting or post on Facebook late at night, especially after a Shiraz or a G&T or two (or watching an episode of Q&A)!
What sounds ‘bold’ or ‘insightful’ at midnight, probably isn’t at 8 the next morning. Especially if you’re talking about your boss…
AFL Issues dictate to fans: Judge Goodes on his skin colour, not his actions
Football commentator Gerard Whateley has branded the booing of Adam Goodes as ‘shameful’, and said that he fears Goodes could be “booed into retirement.”
According to the ABC, this follows the constant booing of Goodes through Sydney’s loss to West Coast in Perth on Sunday.
What’s more, the boos prompted Goodes’ team mate Lewis Jetta to “‘recreate Goodes’ spear-throwing wardance celebration after scoring a goal, in a show of support.”
Like clockwork, Whateley, and others attribute the booing of Goodes to race:
“At its heart here there is a racist element. Not everyone booing is a racist but you are covering up the racist element.
“If you are not booing for racist grounds, stop, because it never used to be part of your day at the footy.
“Stop, and let the racists boo and then call them out, because this is disgustuing [sic].
“We are driving Adam Goodes to the end of his career. He’ll probably finish at the end of this season and he is going to be booed into retirement.”
I must admit, I’m not much of a football fan, so I don’t know the whole story with Goodes, and have only picked up snippets of this ongoing saga over the last few months. But I do remember his performance of a war dance a few months ago which was clearly directed to the opposition crowd. Is this appropriate behavior for a professional sportsman and role model? Other players have been firmly reprimanded for similar aggressive gestures.
It appears that Goodes himself is responsible for at least fueling an antagonistic relationship between himself and opposition crowds, which can only ultimately detract from the game.
Make no mistake, the continued booing of Goodes is personal, and is overshadowing competition. But is it the AFL’s place to tell fans when and who they can boo?
Furthermore, is Adam Goodes the first football player to attract the persistent ire of opposition crowds? I doubt it.
Then perhaps the booing of Goodes has more to do with his tool like behavior, than his Aboriginality?
The crux of the matter is that Goodes is being judged by the public for his actions, not his skin colour. Like so many he asks for exoneration from the consequences of what he does, and progressives enable and encourage him, silencing any criticism for his behavior by citing the race card.
It just isn’t cricket.
“Stop, and let the racists boo and then call them out, because this is disgustuing [sic].
“We are driving Adam Goodes to the end of his career. He’ll probably finish at the end of this season and he is going to be booed into retirement.”
I must admit, I’m not much of a football fan, so I don’t know the whole story with Goodes, and have only picked up snippets of this ongoing saga over the last few months. But I do remember his performance of a war dance a few months ago which was clearly directed to the opposition crowd. Is this appropriate behavior for a professional sportsman and role model? Other players have been firmly reprimanded for similar aggressive gestures.
It appears that Goodes himself is responsible for at least fueling an antagonistic relationship between himself and opposition crowds, which can only ultimately detract from the game.
Make no mistake, the continued booing of Goodes is personal, and is overshadowing competition. But is it the AFL’s place to tell fans when and who they can boo?
Furthermore, is Adam Goodes the first football player to attract the persistent ire of opposition crowds? I doubt it.
Then perhaps the booing of Goodes has more to do with his tool like behavior, than his Aboriginality?
The crux of the matter is that Goodes is being judged by the public for his actions, not his skin colour. Like so many he asks for exoneration from the consequences of what he does, and progressives enable and encourage him, silencing any criticism for his behavior by citing the race card.
It just isn’t cricket. Julia Gillard misogyny speech tea towel finally here!
And here it is at last, the limited edition, Julia Gillard misogyny speech tea towel, containing the full text of the (in)famous speech. No more bored housewife in the home that has one.
The wives of Australia will now be doing the dishes and wiping down the benches whilst snarling out those memorable lines, and God help any man who dares look at his watch whilst she is in full flight with this piece of history, and a stack of soiled crockery, in her hand. And ladies, there’s even more to come. Coming soon are the Penny Wong endorsed foldaway ironing board, and the Jenny Macklin line of hard wearing aprons, perfect for the busy mum in the modern kitchen, keen to get the evening dinner on the table before her hard working husband can tap out his pipe and settle into his favourite armchair. Both are emblazoned with select excerpts of the honourable member’s finest moments in the chamber and sure to please with pain free sedation.
Nothing, just nothing, says out of date, out of touch, and irrelevant, like this! The Liberal National Party offer their thanks and appreciation.
The wives of Australia will now be doing the dishes and wiping down the benches whilst snarling out those memorable lines, and God help any man who dares look at his watch whilst she is in full flight with this piece of history, and a stack of soiled crockery, in her hand. And ladies, there’s even more to come. Coming soon are the Penny Wong endorsed foldaway ironing board, and the Jenny Macklin line of hard wearing aprons, perfect for the busy mum in the modern kitchen, keen to get the evening dinner on the table before her hard working husband can tap out his pipe and settle into his favourite armchair. Both are emblazoned with select excerpts of the honourable member’s finest moments in the chamber and sure to please with pain free sedation.
Nothing, just nothing, says out of date, out of touch, and irrelevant, like this! The Liberal National Party offer their thanks and appreciation. Militant Unionists are the real disgrace
The Labor Party. The only place in Australia, outside a Royal Commission or Fair Work hearing, where militant unionists command attention.
Martin Ferguson has been, and is, a voice of reason in the labour movement, taking a pragmatic and common sense approach to business, enterprise and personal aspiration, that would resonate with the average worker. In response, his own party, led by the union bully boys, condemns him, is ashamed of him, tells him “Wake up to yourself, mate,” and even calls him a disgrace.
Workers of the world unite – they could be speaking about you! Obama urges gay rights, ignores murder and discrimination against Christians
President Barack Obama has taken the opportunity while on a visit to his ancestral home of Kenya to urge the nation to progress on the matter of gays rights.
President Uhuru Kenyatta, Obama’s Kenyan counterpart replied to Obama’s call by stating: “There are some things that we must admit we don’t share. It’s very difficult for us to impose on people that which they themselves do not accept. This is why I say for Kenyans today the issue of gay rights is really a non-issue,” Mr Kenyatta said.
President Kenyatta has real issues to deal with in Kenya, like the growth of Islamic backed terrorism in Africa and the kidnapping and slaughter of scores of Christians. Sadly, these matters don’t rank as highly for President Obama as lighting the White House up in rainbow colours. Nor do these issues rank high enough for President Obama to mention ‘Islam’ and ‘terrorism’ in the same sentence.
Intriguingly, President Obama appears to be unwilling to raise either gay rights or Islamic terrorism when he meets his Arab and Muslim counterparts, but ‘gay rights’ is his leading issue is the devoutly Christian nation of Kenya – a nation that has traditional sexual mores, but tends not to punish homosexuals by throwing them off buildings.
If President Obama’s trip tells us anything, it is that colonialism is alive and well. But colonialism isn’t a bad thing, so long as you’re imposing a progressive, leftist agenda on the ‘backwards’ people of the world.
Furthermore, if the purpose of colonialism is not to assist in the development of the lives of nations and real people, but to posture for a foreign constituency, then it is A-Okay too.
President Kenyatta has real issues to deal with in Kenya, like the growth of Islamic backed terrorism in Africa and the kidnapping and slaughter of scores of Christians. Sadly, these matters don’t rank as highly for President Obama as lighting the White House up in rainbow colours. Nor do these issues rank high enough for President Obama to mention ‘Islam’ and ‘terrorism’ in the same sentence.
Intriguingly, President Obama appears to be unwilling to raise either gay rights or Islamic terrorism when he meets his Arab and Muslim counterparts, but ‘gay rights’ is his leading issue is the devoutly Christian nation of Kenya – a nation that has traditional sexual mores, but tends not to punish homosexuals by throwing them off buildings.
If President Obama’s trip tells us anything, it is that colonialism is alive and well. But colonialism isn’t a bad thing, so long as you’re imposing a progressive, leftist agenda on the ‘backwards’ people of the world.
Furthermore, if the purpose of colonialism is not to assist in the development of the lives of nations and real people, but to posture for a foreign constituency, then it is A-Okay too. Ideological football
“The AFL (and Carlton) have a huge problem. Ninety nine thousand people at the ‘G watch Real Madrid beat Man City. Just 26,000 at Etihad see Hawks flog Blues.”
So tweeted 3AW radio commentator Tom Elliott on Friday night. I will say, right at the beginning of this piece, that a one off soccer game between two of the biggest clubs in the world is not really so much of a problem for the AFL. The more serious, and systemic, problem for the AFL, is the AFL. By that I mean, to put it bluntly, the AFL is badly run, and that is the polite version. Get me at the front bar after an Essendon loss and with the benefit of a few pints of lager, and I will be very likely to rephrase that in rather more robust terms – and I will not be the only one!
The ongoing success of Australian Rules Football relies on the massive support and enthusiasm for the code primarily in the southern states, which is not going to diminish any time soon, and continues, despite the ineptness of the administrators, who have done pretty much all they could to kill the game, if not bring it to its knees.
The evidence for this is abundant, so open a can of bitter and settle in. This is going to take some time. Here are just some of the more obvious ways the AFL has stuffed up football and is actively driving the punters to other codes:
The ongoing success of Australian Rules Football relies on the massive support and enthusiasm for the code primarily in the southern states, which is not going to diminish any time soon, and continues, despite the ineptness of the administrators, who have done pretty much all they could to kill the game, if not bring it to its knees.
The evidence for this is abundant, so open a can of bitter and settle in. This is going to take some time. Here are just some of the more obvious ways the AFL has stuffed up football and is actively driving the punters to other codes:
- Football socialism. First and foremost it’s this. The facts of life are these – someone has to lose. The AFL runs the competition like a pre-school athletics carnival in which there are no winners and no losers and everyone who competes gets a ribbon of the same colour. But in the real world, someone wins and someone loses. To compensate for this harsh reality, and inoculate its competition from it, the AFL rewards failure and penalises success, the goal being to drag everyone down to the same level of mediocrity. The losers get extra picks and extra handouts – the winners get nada. The competition is now one in which the income pool is disproportionately redistributed in the hope that everyone’s team will one day have a chance of winning the big prize and making its supporters feel all warm and fuzzy – not one in which the best are encouraged to be the best, and in which the pursuit of excellence and the prudent management of resources (people, financial and other) are rewarded. No wonder there are so many mind numbingly boring games. One gets the impression the socialist twats at AFL House would love to see a competition in which everyone plays at the same average level, everyone draws every game, and there are no winners and no losers. Just like the workers paradise that was once the Socialist Republic of East Germany, or Pol Pot’s Cambodia, this is a fantasy.
- Social engineering. Indigenous round, womens’ round, multicultural round. For $%#* sake, it’s football you dipsticks. If we wanted Nanny State to lecture us on how to be model citizens and treat others as we would like to be treated ourselves, we’d have gone to church instead of the football, or lobbed in at the local branch of the Greens for a (gluten free, ethically produced) sausage (or grilled eggplant if vegan) over a barbecue and beer. But we came to the football. We came to shout ourselves hoarse, to see some biff, and down a few at the front bar. We did not, and do want, our Football to resemble a cultural studies class in which some wanker in a tweed suit laments the ‘invasion’ of 1788.
- Game times. The morons who run the competition seem to think that every game must be played at a different time on a different day, no doubt to maximise television audiences. This might please the Channel Seven executives, but it’s confusing for the punters who actually want to see their team play in real life. Over time, however, the fans will get the message – you are meant to stay at home and watch it on TV stupid.
- Venues. Related are the venues. Apart from the big stadiums in the big cities, and the long history pf playing games in Geelong, the circus comes now to Launceston and to Alice Springs, to Auckland and Christchurch across the ditch, to Canberra and to Darwin. At some of the lesser venues it would be quite possible, going on the telecast, to back a Ute up to the fence and sit in the tray drinking tinnies, as one does out in the suburbs; or to bring along a Webber and grill some snags in the outer for the friends. The only thing missing are the car horns tooting to announce a goal. This is a long way from the roar of a crowd at a packed ‘G. If the AFL wants its games to resemble the miniscule crowds that grace a Rugby League game in Sydney, then all is fine and well.
- The uneven draw. This is probably the most stupid, and blatantly unfair of all. In a properly run, serious competition of any sort, from a mixed netball competition for factory workers to the English Premier League, every team plays every other team twice, once at home and once away. That is even, and that is fair. How hard can it be to grasp?
- Clashing colours. The concept of an ‘away’ or second strip is a pretty simple, and well established one in other codes, especially soccer. The fundamental principle is this – the change strip is of a different colour and a different design to the home one. The AFL just doesn’t get it, and can’t or won’t enforce it. So we have the farce of one team’s ‘change’ strip being a slightly enlarged sash of exactly the same colour combination, and teams whose colours are all but indistinguishable to the naked eye continuing to run out against each other in their home uniforms, leaving their change strip in the changing rooms.
- Over umpiring. Free kicks for swearing, for squirting water at opposition players, for ‘unsportsmanlike behaviour.’ Umpires crying in the midst of the fray ‘you can’t say that to me.’ This is Australian football. Some games are rendered all but unwatchable as seemingly every passage of play results in a whistle blowing and a free kick being awarded by one of the several umpires on the field. Memo to umpires – just get out of the way you morons – do your job, pay the obvious ones, and then step aside ladies – it’s about the players, not you.
- Hyperventilating commentators. Everything is ‘magical’ or ‘special.’ A player can’t just be good, they are a ‘superstar.’ A news report can’t not include a lengthy report on the shudders going through one team’s medical staff because someone reached for their calf muscle during training. Put away the superlatives and lighten up. A tragedy is what is unfolding in Syria and northern Iraq, not some full forward pulling his hamstring. Listening to Channel Seven at times you would be hard pressed not to wonder if certain unnamed commentators hadn’t actually reached orgasm during some passages of play that were especially pleasing to the eye. It’s good to watch, but not that good. Get your hand of it fellas, drop the hype, and just call the game.
- Cheats. Finally, and this one really turns off the punters more than anything else I expect, there are blatant cheats running around on AFL fields, and no one is willing, or able, to do anything about them. Adam Goodes is a prime example. Brush past him in a marking contest and he assumes the pose of an Olympic diver in freefall, invariably being rewarded with a free kick. Lindsay Thomas is another shameless poser. It’s blatant, it’s obvious, it’s infuriating, but neither the umpires, nor the administrators, seem to want to do anything about it. It’s not rocket science. The cheats are easy to spot, and they are repeat offenders. Do something about it.
I love Linux: She’s Smart, Sleek & Teaching Your Kids
My journey with Free and Open Source Software (FOSS) was a combination of fascination, pragmatism, – and conviction. Today, there are still many computer users who are not familiar with the term FOSS but I’m betting you’re familiar with some of its fruits. What follows is a little of my own story of falling in love with Linux and how FOSS is now a genuine option – coupled with a reflection on the values that got us here.
2000-2005: Hey Developers, Open Source Software Sucks. But I (and millions of others) will still be always in your debt.
When I first discovered open source software as a teenager, I was captivated by the idea that a group of people would get together to make a program, and give it away for free.
I remember sitting at our family computer in 2003 staring at OpenOffice version 1 (if you don’t know what this, You Require Re-Education and are summarily ordered to see the links at the end of the article) and thinking what an amazing gift it was to provide a way that people could, all over the world, now write a letter without the several hundred dollar fee for Microsoft Office.
To me, this program and others like it, weren’t just pieces of software – they were the fruit of an intoxicating combination of generous Love and radical Freedom.
However, Open Office version 1 didn’t become my office program – because, well, it just wasn’t as good as Microsoft Office. You could write a letter or make a basic poster, but it lacked several features that I was accustomed to. So these Free and Open Source programs mostly sat in disks on my shelf, and I still mostly ran windows and closed source programs.
-
This early foray into Open Source software reminds us that great things come from humble beginnings – and the difference is often Perseverance. When the majority of contributors are volunteers working in their spare time, it would have been very easy to throw in the towel during these early clunky efforts. But they didn’t give up – they knew that in order to create a genuine competitor for the ubiquitous MSOffice, it was going to take many years, and many hours of hard, mostly unpaid work. Most of the deeply rewarding things in our life take time and commitment, perseverance and an ability to play the long game.
2006-2012: I don’t know what I want – but I KNOW it’s not what you’re having.
Several years later in 2006 I faced the end of Windows98 support. After watching my father and brothers tussle regularly with XP on their desktops, I was fairly sure that I didn’t want to go down that road. Then, one day after my genius computer programmer brother explained to me that the family’s XP internet connection just “wasn’t in the mood” to work (“Computers Don’t Have MOODS!” I shouted back, “Wireless internet does.” replied my brother dead-pan) – I firmly resolved to find another option.
Internet Explorer sucked – and so we used Mozilla Firefox. Microsoft Office sucked mostly because it was exorbitantly expensive and so we used ‘unofficial back-up’ copies or – had OpenOffice (which had by now had a major new release and was coming along nicely). XP had some clever capabilities, but it sucked – and “There MUST be a better way!” I began to google for alternatives, and so I came to Linux.
I guess I wasn’t your usual young female computer user. I was no developer, but I was a power user who was comfortable adding RAM sticks, using a command prompt and installing programs & drivers. But it was still a leap to installing an entire operating system. I was attracted to Linux for all the same reasons that I wanted to use Open Office – it stood for freedom, trying something new, people working together and making the world a better place. And I wanted in.
What won me over was an honest comment online by someone who built computers in his spare time on which he installed linux then gave to needy children, so in my book he was worth listening to. He said that yes, I would probably have to use the command line at some point (i.e. typing in code by hand to install a program or change a setting), but then he said,
“Do you know how to Copy & Paste? Literally Copy & Paste?” “Yes,” I replied, “I can do that.” “Then you can use Linux.”
This was incredibly encouraging – and so I spent $80 on a proprietary Linux System called Xandros, which that was targeted specifically at Win98 users, and waited with baited breathed for my box to arrive in the mail.
Xandros was a fantastic way to jump into the deep end, but with a lifeguard closely watching on. It was fast and responsive, there were tons of programs (all Free!), and the community I connected to online was passionate and helpful. They encouraged me and answered my questions as I got into the new operating system. I was never belittled or spoken down to – and the one time I had an unusual problem (yes, with the wireless internet), I contacted the local Linux Users Group, and a member called me and we sorted it out together over the phone. It was fixed in less than ten minutes. My Internet, – I smugly told my brother – Does NOT Have Moods!
I continued to devour everything I could about Free and Open Source software and became quite the evangelist. I even gave a couple of talks explaining to local community groups how they could provide OpenOffice & several other flagship programs bundled on a CD, free at their front desks to community members.
Following Xandros, I tested out Ubuntu – another Linux operating system that targeted end-users, seeded with funding from philanthropist Mark Shuttleworth, this one offered entirely for free. It was fairly basic to begin with, but with new versions coming out every six months it came along in leaps and bounds. I did hit some road blocks sometimes (like making my closed source graphics drivers work properly), but mostly what I did was google the problem, open a terminal – and literally Copy and Paste the solution.
By 2012, Linux was coming of age. The community wasn’t just helpful, it was getting strategic and savvy. The user base was growing massively with Linux on televisions, phones & tablets (Android is a version of Linux). And major players like Google added coordination and investment.
-
Competition is a powerful innovator for improvement. Without competition we’d all be stuck using the Internet Explorer of the 2000s (Really, Eeewww.). Competition and innovation – combined with community and passion, has created a powerful force for freedom and liberation in the computer world. Moreover, it’s the open flow of information and the free choices of individuals in the marketplace that have driven adoption of powerful open-source alternatives like Firefox, OpenOffice, Wikipedia, and even Gmail & Google!
-
Take Risks. The biggest issue I have ever come across in working with Open Source software was not glitches or bugs, but FEAR. Many people are afraid to take a risk, “What if I break it?” “I’m not used to this.” etc. Take risks people! And, as anyone who has worked in research and development can tell you – Breaking things a key part of the process. Don’t be afraid to crack a few eggs.
-
Everyone can and should be a philanthropist. It is not only millionaires who can give of their time and talents to transformative projects they are passionate about. I can’t write code, but I am active in the linux community. For example, in 2008 when I got on the ubuntu developers forum and used my talent – namely that I was a linux user who was 23 and Female:
“You want more women installing and liking Linux? Well, the first thing I do with a new computer is change the desktop wallpaper and the colour theme – and all of yours are brown, blue or grey. How about having a pink or purple theme? You have pictures of buildings and bridges – how about some pretty stars?”
A screenshot from Ubuntu 10.04 Netbook Remix I literally wrote that to a community that is basically 30-50 years old and 90% male. But you know what? Ubuntu’s colours are now Black, White, Orange, and three shades of Purple! http://design.ubuntu.com/brand/colour-palette. They listened because I (and other users saying similar things) had something meaningful to contribute to that community.
The low-tax conservative message isn’t necessarily anti-aid or anti-welfare, but it definitely is pro-philanthropy. Yes, you should control your resources – but you should also use them wisely and for the benefit of the whole community. So find what you’re passionate about and get to it!
As an aside, this doesn’t mean you can’t make money from your work (think about the market share of Google or all the phones running Android!). Social enterprise is one of the most enlivening areas to work in – as Katharine Whitehorn famously said, “Find out what you like doing best, and get someone to pay you for it.”
2013-2015: Seeing My Beloved with New Eyes.
In the past couple of years FOSS has matured out of sight. Everybody knows about Wikipedia, most people have a gmail account, programs like the GIMP and VLC have a solid user base and even Mac users are installing Firefox / Chrome web browsers and using OpenOffice as their daily office solution.
In my case, my phone runs Android, it talks to my laptop that runs Ubuntu on which I work using mostly Google mail, storage and calendar applications. There is nothing that I cannot comfortably accomplish with OpenSource software. And I can confidently and positively present today’s FOSS options, with Ubuntu and new starters like Elementary helping to give linux the end-user focused, polished public face that it deserves:
Sure, I’ve always loved Linux. I was swept up in the romance and radical culture of freedom that I see in the Open Source community, but truth-be-told, until these past two years, I still expected a glitch or two every time I upgraded.
But then, just this week I installed linux on an old 2007 Acer laptop that was donated to my workplace. The laptop had a factory install of Windows but was frustratingly slow, so I decided to install LXLE – a linux operating system designed for older hardware. Unlike just a few years ago, I didn’t have to google to see if Linux would run. I didn’t have to worry about the graphics card, or being connected to the internet via ethernet cable when I installed it in case the wireless didn’t work, I know it will sync with my phone, play my music and manage display and battery life efficiently.
I just downloaded it, put it on a usb drive and installed it with about ten clicks & 30 minutes. Once it was installed I downloaded Chrome, changed the desktop wallpaper (LXLE offers 100 pre-installed to pick from) and added a Documents folder shortcut to the desktop. That was literally it. The 2007 laptop is now running very snappily and perfectly with less than an hour’s work. I was so impressed that the following day I installed it on my personal laptop (a samsung laptop from 2011). Same story – start to finish 30 minutes, everything working straight ‘out of the box.’
There have been stars in my eyes for the past two days. It was like looking at one’s spouse with new eyes and saying, “It’s been a tough ride sticking by you at times, but we’ve both learned a lot and you know what: You’re Absolutely Amazing.”
And once again, I’ve become an evangelist: Imagine if every laptop made from 2007 to today was running fast and efficiently using truly free software that could be shared and read by anyone who was interested (no sneaky viruses or spyware here). Not only does this mean that we can salvage much ‘old hardware’ and give it new life but the opportunities for education are absolutely unprecedented. This goes from children learning to type on LibreOffice, to teenagers who can study for college entrance exams on Kahn Academy, to adults living in developing nations who can learn about building techniques, first aid and crop yields on Wikipedia. We can all benefit from Free and Open Source Software.
Linux has grown up. She’s sleek and sexy, and she hasn’t lost her values. This is an operating system you can take to the party AND bring home to your mother.
-
Open Source software should be our first go to option before closed source software, because increased development in FOSS doesn’t just benefit me, but benefits everyone across the globe, and importantly because it’s Damn Good stuff. Linux has a place alongside Windows and Mac computers and even out-shines them in certain respects.
-
FOSS was created because people got out there and formed communities, they took risks and broke things, they committed, innovated, competed, and persevered. And in a few short years, they have changed the world.
Don’t be afraid to take risks. Try something different, feel that Fear of change – and do it anyway.
A selection of the software mentioned above is listed here not just for your reference – but FOR YOUR USE.-
https://www.libreoffice.org LibreOffice. Offers word processing, spreadsheet, and slide presentation, drawing and database appications.
-
http://www.gimp.org The GNU Image Manipulation Program. Powerful image creation and photo-editing program.
-
http://www.ubuntu.com A flagship linux operating system. Download to a DVD or USB and install alongside windows or to completely replace it. Includes games, office, email, music & internet programs etc.
-
http://www.lxle.net A particular version of Ubuntu that I have fallen in love with – aimed at older computers like my laptop from 2007.
-
https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox Mozilla Firefox. Still one of the best web browsers out there.
-
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferrocement Wikipedia. A free to access, community maintained encyclopedia. This link defaults to the article on Ferro-Cement because many years ago I showed the early Wikipedia to my Dad and I asked him to pick any topic. He picked Ferro-Cement and at the time there was no page on it… Now there is – Here you go, Dad, we got there in the end 🙂
The collapse of global poverty
If I asked you this question – ‘is there more poverty in the world now than there was 25 years ago?’ what would you say?
I bet many would reply, ‘yes, of course, there is much more poverty now than there was 25 years ago!’
Going by the messages we are fed through our media outlets, one would not be blamed for assuming that there is greater poverty and inequality now than ever before, furthermore, that the planet’s ecological system is on the brink of collapse, placing all of us in peril, and the earth is either going to flood with rising seas or it will explode from climate change in the next 5 years.
But I digress.
Back to poverty.
Between 1990 and 2015, the number of people living in poverty fell from 1.9 billion to 836 million.
This is incredible!
This dramatic collapse in global poverty has also happened over a period where the earth’s population grew from 5 billion to 7 billion people.
This is quite an accomplishment!
What’s more, economic models predict that extreme poverty will be all but eradicated within the next 20-30 years.
Who should be given the credit for this great achievement in poverty eradication? Should it be attributed to the United Nations and the success their Millennium Development Goals? The boosting of foreign aid? Government wealth redistribution policies?
No.
This lifting of the greatest number of people out of poverty has occurred because of trade liberalisation.
China can take credit for its free market reforms which it began implementing from the late 1970s and early 1980s.
These reforms in China meant that 680 million people have been lifted out of poverty since 1980. “Indeed, China accounts for three quarters of the people moving out of poverty over the last three decades.” It is also worth noting China has never shown any interest in the United Nations’ Millennium Development Goals, nor in policies of wealth redistribution which are becoming fashionable in the West.
In China, this spectacular economic and social development has seen the children of peasant farmers move to work in the manufacturing industry, to their children having the opportunity for higher education and employment in the professions. This is an amazing development.
But China is not the only place that great numbers have been lifted out of poverty.
According to the Institute for Public Affairs: “Growth in other developing countries has lifted 280 million people out of poverty since 2000 according to former World Bank economist Martin Ravallion.”
I will leave you with this final insight from the IPA’s Peter Gregory:
“There is a lesson in this for foreign aid and charity. If free markets are lifting so many hundreds of millions of people out of poverty, foreign aid must re-cast its role as enabling poor people to participate in markets.”
The opportunity to trade, to form new relationships, and partnerships, and to participate in markets is perhaps the most significant way to eradicate poverty.
Political leaders and social activists: Take note.
This dramatic collapse in global poverty has also happened over a period where the earth’s population grew from 5 billion to 7 billion people.
This is quite an accomplishment!
What’s more, economic models predict that extreme poverty will be all but eradicated within the next 20-30 years.
Who should be given the credit for this great achievement in poverty eradication? Should it be attributed to the United Nations and the success their Millennium Development Goals? The boosting of foreign aid? Government wealth redistribution policies?
No.
This lifting of the greatest number of people out of poverty has occurred because of trade liberalisation.
China can take credit for its free market reforms which it began implementing from the late 1970s and early 1980s.
These reforms in China meant that 680 million people have been lifted out of poverty since 1980. “Indeed, China accounts for three quarters of the people moving out of poverty over the last three decades.” It is also worth noting China has never shown any interest in the United Nations’ Millennium Development Goals, nor in policies of wealth redistribution which are becoming fashionable in the West.
In China, this spectacular economic and social development has seen the children of peasant farmers move to work in the manufacturing industry, to their children having the opportunity for higher education and employment in the professions. This is an amazing development.
But China is not the only place that great numbers have been lifted out of poverty.
According to the Institute for Public Affairs: “Growth in other developing countries has lifted 280 million people out of poverty since 2000 according to former World Bank economist Martin Ravallion.”
I will leave you with this final insight from the IPA’s Peter Gregory:
“There is a lesson in this for foreign aid and charity. If free markets are lifting so many hundreds of millions of people out of poverty, foreign aid must re-cast its role as enabling poor people to participate in markets.”
The opportunity to trade, to form new relationships, and partnerships, and to participate in markets is perhaps the most significant way to eradicate poverty.
Political leaders and social activists: Take note. Shocking: CIS-gendered male fails to adequately celebrate transgendered female’s courage!
In a new move toward absolute compliance of their social agenda, 21st century totalitarians are now actively assessing the adequacy of one’s applause at public events celebrating progressive achievements.
Those, like former NFL athlete Brett Favre, caught on film offering only lukewarm acclamation as Caitlyn Jenner accepted a bravery award for rearranging his / her genitalia, can expect public shaming – for now. As leftist love-ins become more and more like a Nuremberg rally, with the conformity police scanning the footage afterwards for offenders, publicity agents are warning their clients to adopt an especially joyous persona whenever same sex marriage is mentioned at a public event, and to consider calling out ‘bravo’ or perhaps cheering for an encore, whenever an award or public recognition of some description goes to a ‘minority.’
Agents further warn that excuses, like ‘I’m just a football player’ or ‘I’m just a scientist,’ simply won’t appease the Stasi-like comrades of today’s press gallery. ‘Inclusion and tolerance’ is essential today, one celebrity agent told XYZ. ‘It’s quite simple really, those who can’t be inclusive and can’t be tolerant, simply can’t be included and can’t be tolerated.’
Yes, indeed. Which way to the Gulag then comrade?
Those, like former NFL athlete Brett Favre, caught on film offering only lukewarm acclamation as Caitlyn Jenner accepted a bravery award for rearranging his / her genitalia, can expect public shaming – for now. As leftist love-ins become more and more like a Nuremberg rally, with the conformity police scanning the footage afterwards for offenders, publicity agents are warning their clients to adopt an especially joyous persona whenever same sex marriage is mentioned at a public event, and to consider calling out ‘bravo’ or perhaps cheering for an encore, whenever an award or public recognition of some description goes to a ‘minority.’
Agents further warn that excuses, like ‘I’m just a football player’ or ‘I’m just a scientist,’ simply won’t appease the Stasi-like comrades of today’s press gallery. ‘Inclusion and tolerance’ is essential today, one celebrity agent told XYZ. ‘It’s quite simple really, those who can’t be inclusive and can’t be tolerant, simply can’t be included and can’t be tolerated.’
Yes, indeed. Which way to the Gulag then comrade? The six hot topics at ALP national conference.
The six hot topics at ALP national conference – You would expect these to be the issues that really matter to the mums and dads of Australia, out there in the suburbs working two jobs to pay the mortgage and keep the kids in a private school, right? Things like the cost of living, energy bills, the economy, employment and opportunity, right? Wrong.
The hot topics of crucial importance to the gathering of Labor party faithful, that will occasion the impassioned speeches, and procure the most earnest hand wringing (apart from the moment mid-way during Comrade Bill’s speech when he says for the fourth time ‘Let me take you through this point because I know it’s an important one’) will be – socialism, climate change, same sex marriage, unions, national security and asylum seekers.
Setting aside asylum seekers and national security, which are of importance to most Australians in the current global environment, can anyone seriously imagine the topic of conversation in a front bar somewhere turning to socialist fantasies such as those enshrined in the (1921) Labor constitution? Or the employees of a small business somewhere earnestly discussing the role and place of unions in the workforce of the 21st century over their Friday evening get together, when close to nine in ten of all workers in the private sector are not union members, have probably never met a union representative, and if they know anything about unions, it’s the thugs hurling abuse (or worse) on the picket line at some construction site lockout who immediately come to mind?
And then there is same sex marriage. Yawn. Most Australians don’t really care what consenting adults, married or not, do to each other in the privacy of their own bedrooms, even if they don’t want or need to know the sordid details. It will be a triumphant moment if the conference consents, by conscience or compulsion, to same sex marriage – triumphant, that is, among the inner city vegan crowd who vote Green anyway.
Personally I especially enjoy the moment at the end of these nation-wide comings together of Labor types when the comrades link arms and sing Solidarity Forever. Nothing says anachronistic, irrelevant, and out of touch, than a smiling rendition of a chorus fondly recalling class battles and stereotypes of the distant past. Nothing makes the Labor leader caught up in a moment of, err solidarity, like this, look more like yesterday’s man or woman (yesterday, that is, as in about two centuries ago).
Sadly, the vast majority of punters out there in the suburbs, the workplaces, and the pubs and clubs of this great nation won’t see that moment, and won’t give a stuff about it, or the ALP national conference, even if they did know it was on. They will have much better things to do on their weekend. And if they did catch a bit of the conference on the news, a few seconds of a lobotomy inducing Shorten oration would see off anyone not physically restrained anyway.
The hot topics of crucial importance to the gathering of Labor party faithful, that will occasion the impassioned speeches, and procure the most earnest hand wringing (apart from the moment mid-way during Comrade Bill’s speech when he says for the fourth time ‘Let me take you through this point because I know it’s an important one’) will be – socialism, climate change, same sex marriage, unions, national security and asylum seekers.
Setting aside asylum seekers and national security, which are of importance to most Australians in the current global environment, can anyone seriously imagine the topic of conversation in a front bar somewhere turning to socialist fantasies such as those enshrined in the (1921) Labor constitution? Or the employees of a small business somewhere earnestly discussing the role and place of unions in the workforce of the 21st century over their Friday evening get together, when close to nine in ten of all workers in the private sector are not union members, have probably never met a union representative, and if they know anything about unions, it’s the thugs hurling abuse (or worse) on the picket line at some construction site lockout who immediately come to mind?
And then there is same sex marriage. Yawn. Most Australians don’t really care what consenting adults, married or not, do to each other in the privacy of their own bedrooms, even if they don’t want or need to know the sordid details. It will be a triumphant moment if the conference consents, by conscience or compulsion, to same sex marriage – triumphant, that is, among the inner city vegan crowd who vote Green anyway.
Personally I especially enjoy the moment at the end of these nation-wide comings together of Labor types when the comrades link arms and sing Solidarity Forever. Nothing says anachronistic, irrelevant, and out of touch, than a smiling rendition of a chorus fondly recalling class battles and stereotypes of the distant past. Nothing makes the Labor leader caught up in a moment of, err solidarity, like this, look more like yesterday’s man or woman (yesterday, that is, as in about two centuries ago).
Sadly, the vast majority of punters out there in the suburbs, the workplaces, and the pubs and clubs of this great nation won’t see that moment, and won’t give a stuff about it, or the ALP national conference, even if they did know it was on. They will have much better things to do on their weekend. And if they did catch a bit of the conference on the news, a few seconds of a lobotomy inducing Shorten oration would see off anyone not physically restrained anyway. Breaking: Climate Scientists shocked to find ice at the Arctic
BREAKING: Climate scientists aboard a ship bound for the Arctic were shocked to find that the sea ice they expected to be melting due to global warming was, in fact, in such plentiful supply, they couldn’t get through it.
All is not lost however.
The expedition has uncovered one, important fact, that will make an ongoing contribution to science, and to that related discipline, the theology of global warming. They have discovered categorical proof that there is an acute difference between a computer model and reality.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/north/ccgs-amundsen-re-routed-to-hudson-bay-to-help-with-heavy-ice-1.3162900?cmp=rss
All is not lost however.
The expedition has uncovered one, important fact, that will make an ongoing contribution to science, and to that related discipline, the theology of global warming. They have discovered categorical proof that there is an acute difference between a computer model and reality.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/north/ccgs-amundsen-re-routed-to-hudson-bay-to-help-with-heavy-ice-1.3162900?cmp=rss Andrew Bolt is a Bloody Aussie Legend
Watching The Bolt Report on Sunday mornings makes me very, very happy. I enjoy the cheeky, knowledgeable grin on Andrew Bolt’s face, a grin which says that he knows exactly what he is doing. (Disclaimer: I don’t know him from a bar of soap, so all of this is speculation.) He knows that he is presenting political commentary which is well informed but quite openly biased. He knows that everybody who watches his show can discern almost immediately on which side of the fence he sits, and make up their own minds. He knows that he is being just as biased to the right as the ABC is to the left, but he has no qualms admitting this bias.
This is in contrast to the front of independence and impartiality behind which the ABC pretends to hide, while their left wing worldview permeates everything they do. When you listen to or read Andrew Bolt, you are immediately struck by the beautiful sense of freedom a man possesses when says what he means and means what he says, who isn’t trying to maintain a cognitive dissonance about his feigned adherence to some charter.
I first became aware of Andrew Bolt’s existence in the 2000’s, by way of the lefty circles in which I found myself. The way they spoke about him, I assumed he must have been illiterate. I assumed that his articles were simply illogical rants put to paper. As my Classical Liberal principles were still forming, I assumed he must be one of those right wing nut jobs about whom the professors and hot girls on campus always used to go on, with whom I should be careful not to associate myself, or even read, given just how intensely angry my lefty acquaintances would become at the mere mention of his name.
It wouldn’t have been until after my switch in the mid 2000’s from reading The Age, which for some reason always left me terribly depressed, to The Australian, which I found uplifting, that I finally summoned the courage to read his poisonous words. I had recently seen him interviewed briefly on a subject, and I was quite surprised to see a suited man speaking eloquently and precisely, and who made a good deal of sense. I had been expecting an obese, swearing bogan. (Yep, I didn’t even know what he looked like.) It occurs to me now that the social pressure not to read anything that he said was akin to the social pressure on the mind a cult follower to avoid thinking critically about the mush you are being fed, lest you reason your way out of the cult’s grip and thus reason your way to eternal damnation.
When I read Andrew Bolt now, and consider how on earth I managed to live so long without reading his columns, I recognise that he, too, is someone who understands the importance of language, of narrative, and of how the left work so hard to control both. He has the grin of a person who knows that even though a kangaroo court, set up by “progressives” and dedicated to promoting “progressive” ideology, banned the publication of one of his articles, the substance of the argument he made in that article was proven correct within a few short years. He is someone who understands that by simply saying what he is saying, and to a certain extent his very existence itself, makes many people on the left viciously, inexplicably angry.
It is for these reasons that I say this; Andrew Bolt is a Bloody Aussie Legend.
Photo by purple camel 
This is in contrast to the front of independence and impartiality behind which the ABC pretends to hide, while their left wing worldview permeates everything they do. When you listen to or read Andrew Bolt, you are immediately struck by the beautiful sense of freedom a man possesses when says what he means and means what he says, who isn’t trying to maintain a cognitive dissonance about his feigned adherence to some charter.
I first became aware of Andrew Bolt’s existence in the 2000’s, by way of the lefty circles in which I found myself. The way they spoke about him, I assumed he must have been illiterate. I assumed that his articles were simply illogical rants put to paper. As my Classical Liberal principles were still forming, I assumed he must be one of those right wing nut jobs about whom the professors and hot girls on campus always used to go on, with whom I should be careful not to associate myself, or even read, given just how intensely angry my lefty acquaintances would become at the mere mention of his name.
It wouldn’t have been until after my switch in the mid 2000’s from reading The Age, which for some reason always left me terribly depressed, to The Australian, which I found uplifting, that I finally summoned the courage to read his poisonous words. I had recently seen him interviewed briefly on a subject, and I was quite surprised to see a suited man speaking eloquently and precisely, and who made a good deal of sense. I had been expecting an obese, swearing bogan. (Yep, I didn’t even know what he looked like.) It occurs to me now that the social pressure not to read anything that he said was akin to the social pressure on the mind a cult follower to avoid thinking critically about the mush you are being fed, lest you reason your way out of the cult’s grip and thus reason your way to eternal damnation.
When I read Andrew Bolt now, and consider how on earth I managed to live so long without reading his columns, I recognise that he, too, is someone who understands the importance of language, of narrative, and of how the left work so hard to control both. He has the grin of a person who knows that even though a kangaroo court, set up by “progressives” and dedicated to promoting “progressive” ideology, banned the publication of one of his articles, the substance of the argument he made in that article was proven correct within a few short years. He is someone who understands that by simply saying what he is saying, and to a certain extent his very existence itself, makes many people on the left viciously, inexplicably angry.
It is for these reasons that I say this; Andrew Bolt is a Bloody Aussie Legend.
Photo by purple camel World with a weaker United States
What will the world be like with a weaker United States?
I believe the world will be much worse off.
However, I freely acknowledge that there is a deep resentment amongst many over America’s assumed responsibility as the ‘world’s policeman’, and many people in the West and outside eagerly await its decline and collapse as the world’s sole superpower. With President Barack Obama at the helm since 2008, the re-emergence of Russia, the rise of China and the other BRIC nations (Brazil, Russia, India China) this collapse may happen sooner than we think.
It is true that the United States has at times interfered in the domestic affairs of other nations, and has created and exacerbated problems around the world, as well as resolving them. But a world without a superior United States is not going to be a fairer or more equitable world, rather, it will be a world with much greater instability and conflict as nations jostle for power and influence. We are already seeing this – whether it is in the Middle East, Russia and Ukraine, or the tensions heating up in the East China Sea.
The United States’ diplomatic power has contracted significantly in only the last few years, and the superpower is no longer taken as seriously as it once was.
These and other events that have taken place over the last couple of years give us a hint of what will become the new ‘normal’ in world affairs.
The author Mark Steyn wrote in detail in his 2006 book, America Alone, about this very situation we are now facing.
And this new ‘normal’ in world affairs, with a weakened United States, is going to be a lot more unstable, uncertain and potentially much more dangerous for all.
lm since 2008, the re-emergence of Russia, the rise of China and the other BRIC nations (Brazil, Russia, India China) this collapse may happen sooner than we think.
It is true that the United States has at times interfered in the domestic affairs of other nations, and has created and exacerbated problems around the world, as well as resolving them. But a world without a superior United States is not going to be a fairer or more equitable world, rather, it will be a world with much greater instability and conflict as nations jostle for power and influence. We are already seeing this – whether it is in the Middle East, Russia and Ukraine, or the tensions heating up in the East China Sea.
The United States’ diplomatic power has contracted significantly in only the last few years, and the superpower is no longer taken as seriously as it once was.
These and other events that have taken place over the last couple of years give us a hint of what will become the new ‘normal’ in world affairs.
The author Mark Steyn wrote in detail in his 2006 book, America Alone, about this very situation we are now facing.
And this new ‘normal’ in world affairs, with a weakened United States, is going to be a lot more unstable, uncertain and potentially much more dangerous for all.
With friends like these…
Poor Bill Slogan, his stocks among the comrades, union bully boys and compassionate luvvies are now so low he can’t even give a speech before his own party’s faithful without being booed off the podium.
Now he knows what it’s like to be a Coalition politician on a Q&A panel. In fact, the comparison is not a bad one, in that the ALP conference is a lot like a Q&A audience in many ways, being made up of unionists and progressive types out of place in Australian suburbia everywhere except Newtown and Fitzroy, and wherein any reference to turning back asylum seeker boats draws hoots of derision, whilst any Greens representative is cheered the moment their lips begin to move in anticipation of vocalisation.
In our humble opinion Bill is making the right call here on asylum seeker policy, and it is the most compassionate option which will stop thousands of people dying at sea, despite the hollow calls and moral posturing of the left.
Furthermore, it’s what the voters want and demand from their leaders, and it’s what the current government has delivered – it’s the Labor party members who are irrelevant and out of touch.
bad one, in that the ALP conference is a lot like a Q&A audience in many ways, being made up of unionists and progressive types out of place in Australian suburbia everywhere except Newtown and Fitzroy, and wherein any reference to turning back asylum seeker boats draws hoots of derision, whilst any Greens representative is cheered the moment their lips begin to move in anticipation of vocalisation.
In our humble opinion Bill is making the right call here on asylum seeker policy, and it is the most compassionate option which will stop thousands of people dying at sea, despite the hollow calls and moral posturing of the left.
Furthermore, it’s what the voters want and demand from their leaders, and it’s what the current government has delivered – it’s the Labor party members who are irrelevant and out of touch. Dear Barnesy, get over it.
I realised how old I was getting during the course of a recent, quite amicable, conversation with a representative of the younger generation (perhaps X or Y, I’m never quite sure what the age brackets are). The conversation turned to music, upon which the tattooed and much pierced representative of said younger generation asked for my preferences, rather like the way a child might ask his or her grandparents about an artefact in a museum display cabinet. I offered the usual for my own generation – AC/DC, Cold Chisel, Billy Ray Cyrus, the earlier Van Halen – after which the question was turned to my partner, who replied, genuinely and instantly, ‘Duran Duran.’ ‘Who sings that?’ Gen X or Y type asked.
A gap of another sort appeared over the apparent use of Cold Chisel tracks at a recent Reclaim rally. The gravel voiced lead singer of the band was non-plussed, and insisted the Reclaimers desist from belting out Khe Sahn or Flame Trees on the barricades. Apparently Mr Barnes does not like their cause. I expect Bach did not write his Cantatas to be elevator music, nor did Albioni necessarily produce his Adagio to be the moment of mutual climax for entwined lovers in a cinematic love scene (or perhaps he did). I’m sure, however, Beethoven did not anticipate he was composing his 9th Symphony to accompany vision of someone being beaten into a bloody pulp in a scene from A Clockwork Orange. We can safely assume Barnesy did not drop a bottle of vodka in order to come up with the immortal line ‘You got nothing I want, you got nothing I need,’ so some overweight guy in a denim jacket could sing along to it at a rally pointing out the less attractive features of sharia law.
But isn’t that the point? Whatever the artist intended, once out there, gone commercial, and in the public domain, it’s gone baby, and, in many ways, it’s yours no more. The punters will do obscene things with your creativity, both in private and in public, and there ain’t nothing you can do about it, short of enforcing copyright for commercial misuse. If some pimpled bogan downloads your track onto his itunes and plays it really loud over a battery driven sound enhancing contraption of some description at a rally, and a hundred other unwashed bogans sing along with him, not only is it looking and sounding a lot like a Chisel gig ca, 1982 in an RSL somewhere, but who’s going to stop them? And why should they listen to an ageing rocker anyway, even if you wrote the bloody thing and first recorded it?
The only thing more perverse than a once screechingly decadent ageing rock star taking the high moral ground, is a human rights lawyer taking the high moral ground. Get down off the high horse Barnsey, reconnect with the punters who made your fortune, and let it rock.
A gap of another sort appeared over the apparent use of Cold Chisel tracks at a recent Reclaim rally. The gravel voiced lead singer of the band was non-plussed, and insisted the Reclaimers desist from belting out Khe Sahn or Flame Trees on the barricades. Apparently Mr Barnes does not like their cause. I expect Bach did not write his Cantatas to be elevator music, nor did Albioni necessarily produce his Adagio to be the moment of mutual climax for entwined lovers in a cinematic love scene (or perhaps he did). I’m sure, however, Beethoven did not anticipate he was composing his 9th Symphony to accompany vision of someone being beaten into a bloody pulp in a scene from A Clockwork Orange. We can safely assume Barnesy did not drop a bottle of vodka in order to come up with the immortal line ‘You got nothing I want, you got nothing I need,’ so some overweight guy in a denim jacket could sing along to it at a rally pointing out the less attractive features of sharia law.
But isn’t that the point? Whatever the artist intended, once out there, gone commercial, and in the public domain, it’s gone baby, and, in many ways, it’s yours no more. The punters will do obscene things with your creativity, both in private and in public, and there ain’t nothing you can do about it, short of enforcing copyright for commercial misuse. If some pimpled bogan downloads your track onto his itunes and plays it really loud over a battery driven sound enhancing contraption of some description at a rally, and a hundred other unwashed bogans sing along with him, not only is it looking and sounding a lot like a Chisel gig ca, 1982 in an RSL somewhere, but who’s going to stop them? And why should they listen to an ageing rocker anyway, even if you wrote the bloody thing and first recorded it?
The only thing more perverse than a once screechingly decadent ageing rock star taking the high moral ground, is a human rights lawyer taking the high moral ground. Get down off the high horse Barnsey, reconnect with the punters who made your fortune, and let it rock. Wally of the Week
Welcome to the newest XYZ segment, Wally of the Week, named after Everyone’s Favourite Muslim Apologist[TM], Waleed Aly. The honour of being the first cab off the ranks has to go to Bill Slogan, sorry, Bill Shorten, whom we have to thank for one of the most glorious train-wrecks of an interview of all time, on last night’s 7:30 Report on the ABC. His performance has sparked outrage on the left, and hilarity on the right. We offer this little morsel:
“Well we’ve started to outline our policies now. I mean we’ve said today that we support, by 2030, the ambition of having 50 per cent of our energy mix that Australians use and households and business being derived from renewable energy sources.
“We support…the ambition of having 50 per cent of our energy mix…being derived from renewable energy sources”
Shorten (ha) it to: “Labor’s policy – support ambition; guarantee nothing.”
It’s your XYZ. What a drag!
What a drag! (excuse gratuitous pun). To be in Glasgow for the Pride march, and the series of associated events, to have sat at the mirror for hours caking on the makeup, done up the high heels, put on the outrageously flambouyant evening dress, dropped a tube of lube into the Gucci accessory, and, OMG, KMDWAF (* “knock me down with a feather”), then call my therapist – no f…ing drag queens at a f…ing pride march. Que? WTF?
But yes, alas (insert high pitched squeal of frustration here) for this is so. No men dressed as girls will be gracing the pride pavement in Glasgow this year. As one of the organisers tearfully told a press conference:
“The decision was taken by transgender individuals who were uncomfortable with having drag performances at the event. It was felt that it would make some of those who were transgender or questioning their gender uncomfortable.”
Well, punch me in the face unless I palm slap my own forehead vigorously several times in quick succession. How could anyone not have seen this one coming? (no pun intended). If you say the transgender people are “uncomfortable” then that settles it then. We can’t have anyone feeling uncomfortable or (God forbid) offended at a pride march. And since we’re taking feedback on the offense taking, how long until the Pangender people, or the Gender Curious mob, or the “waiting for the op” cohort, crack the sads, and get all uncomfortable, with the boring conservative toffs who just describe themselves as plain old boring gay? I mean, can’t these lifeless lards even manage to put a pronominal “trans” in their self description somewhere?
So now that the pride marchers are offending each other, how long will it be until everyone is so offended, and unbearably uncomfortable, that no one will be welcome at the march at all, and it will end up looking like a gay marriage bucks night the local mosque? For Glasgow, the economic ruin will be, well, ruinous – the bottom will surely fall out the market for black leather trousers with the arse cut out of them (pun intended). What a drag!
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/drag-queens-banned-from-pride-event-because-they-may-offend-transgender-people-10403198.html
Well, punch me in the face unless I palm slap my own forehead vigorously several times in quick succession. How could anyone not have seen this one coming? (no pun intended). If you say the transgender people are “uncomfortable” then that settles it then. We can’t have anyone feeling uncomfortable or (God forbid) offended at a pride march. And since we’re taking feedback on the offense taking, how long until the Pangender people, or the Gender Curious mob, or the “waiting for the op” cohort, crack the sads, and get all uncomfortable, with the boring conservative toffs who just describe themselves as plain old boring gay? I mean, can’t these lifeless lards even manage to put a pronominal “trans” in their self description somewhere?
So now that the pride marchers are offending each other, how long will it be until everyone is so offended, and unbearably uncomfortable, that no one will be welcome at the march at all, and it will end up looking like a gay marriage bucks night the local mosque? For Glasgow, the economic ruin will be, well, ruinous – the bottom will surely fall out the market for black leather trousers with the arse cut out of them (pun intended). What a drag!
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/drag-queens-banned-from-pride-event-because-they-may-offend-transgender-people-10403198.html