World Politics

[Amsterhammer]

Oh Well, that's a very critical point of view.

Rhubroma is a very critical kind of guy.

 

[auscyclefan94]

Hi ACF

1. No

2. Yes

3. Sadly, as a resident Yank I can only vote in local, not national elections. If I had been able to vote, I would either have gone for the party closest to my heart, the SP, or I might have strategically voted for the PvdA, Dutch Labor, as very many others did in the vain hope of stopping the VVD from becoming the largest party.

(The Dutch Socialist Party, like all European parties with the word Socialist in their names, is a social-democratic party that is in no way comparable to eastern European 'socialist' parties of yesteryear.)

The final results -

26,6% : VVD (41 seats; 2,4 m votes)
24,8% : PvdA (39 seats; 2,3 m votes)
10,1%: PVV (15 seats; 933.000 votes)
9,7% : SP (15 seats; 893.000 votes)
8,5% : CDA (13 seats; 788.000 votes)
7,9% : D66 (12 zetels; 732.000 votes)
3,1% : ChristenUnie (Christian Union) (5 seats; 288.000 votes)
2,3% : GroenLinks (Green-left) (3 seats; 214.000 votes)
2,1& : SGP (Religious fundamentalist) (3 seats; 195.000 votes)
1,9% : PvdD (Animal rights party) (2 seats; 178.000 votes)
1,9% : 50Plus (2 seats; 174.000 votes)

Biggest winners by comparison with the last election - VVD, PvdA, 50+ (first election)

Biggest losers - PVV (loony Wilders), CDA, Green-left.

The Dutch parliament has 150 seats. You can do the math to see how impossible any coalition except a grand one between the two major parties has become as a result of this election.

I guess you would find it annoying not being able to vote.

How could that possibly work as I don't understand how such a Parliament could operate? Australia has a 'hung parliament' like you guys will have and there is enough in-fighting between the two left wing parties, let alone two ideologically opposed parties.

When was the last time that a Party achieved an absolute majority in your Parliament?

 

[auscyclefan94]

I think you misunderstood Rhub. I believe he means that it's pretty irrelevant what parties are actually in 'power' in any given western country when the real 'power' and influence in this world is wielded by global banks and financial institutions, whose control and manipulation of the 'markets' determines the context of our existence, wherever we are.

I'd have to agree somewhat with Rhubroma. Speaking from experience, it amazes me to read the number of past and current high end politicians in Australia who are connected to Global Banks and/or financial institutions. In saying this, I don't take such a critical view of Australian politics or even politics in western countries as I do think that the party in control does have a large influence over the global and local markets amongst other things.

 

[auscyclefan94]

Amsterhammer, your Dutch friend Mr Geert Wilders may be coming to Australia in the near future.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-09-18/geert-wilders-applies-for-australian-visa/4268532

 

[Amsterhammer]

Amsterhammer, your Dutch friend Mr Geert Wilders may be coming to Australia in the near future.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-09-18/geert-wilders-applies-for-australian-visa/4268532

I understand that your lot are (quite sensibly) considering not giving him a visa! Since he suffered a significant defeat at the recent election and is no longer in any position to affect the outcome of coalition negotiations, he will now revert to his raison d'etre of Muslim bashing, anywhere that someone will give him a podium to do so.

I guess you would find it annoying not being able to vote.

How could that possibly work as I don't understand how such a Parliament could operate? Australia has a 'hung parliament' like you guys will have and there is enough in-fighting between the two left wing parties, let alone two ideologically opposed parties.

When was the last time that a Party achieved an absolute majority in your Parliament?

No single party has ever had an absolute majority in the Dutch parliament, so there has never been a government consisting of only one party. The entire Dutch system is predicated on the principle of compromise - about everything - it's called the 'Polder model'.

We will have a grand coalition of the two largest parties (VVD and PvdA), in effect, Tories and Labour, once they've hammered out sufficient compromises in the coming weeks of discussions between the two. This will be the first time (that I recall) in my 23 years here that only two parties have achieved enough seats to form a government, so this coalition is likely to last its full term, unlike many other recent ones.

 

[auscyclefan94]

I understand that your lot are (quite sensibly) considering not giving him a visa! Since he suffered a significant defeat at the recent election and is no longer in any position to affect the outcome of coalition negotiations, he will now revert to his raison d'etre of Muslim bashing, anywhere that someone will give him a podium to do so.



No single party has ever had an absolute majority in the Dutch parliament, so there has never been a government consisting of only one party. The entire Dutch system is predicated on the principle of compromise - about everything - it's called the 'Polder model'.

We will have a grand coalition of the two largest parties (VVD and PvdA), in effect, Tories and Labour, once they've hammered out sufficient compromises in the coming weeks of discussions between the two. This will be the first time (that I recall) in my 23 years here that only two parties have achieved enough seats to form a government, so this coalition is likely to last its full term, unlike many other recent ones.

It is odd that we give a visa to some Muslim extremists in recent weeks yet don't to Geert Wilders. I don't support what Wilders says on most topics but if you are going to set a precedent with one person, then you should stay consistent with it and let all types of people in.

I personally don't see how the Polder model could operate that well. You have people on other sides of politics trying to compromise. It doesn't seem feasible. Surely people would become sick of the parties because they would all have to compromise on their platforms and beliefs therefore ****ing off their voters. On many issues I would imagine that nothing gets done because of that.

 

[Amsterhammer]

Originally Posted by Galic Ho
I didn't defend him. I defended freedom of speech that is tempered without the constraints of political correctness. Note I did give two schools of thought for your understanding. I laughed at the first one and said it was likely you fell not into that, but the later. You've taken this wrong way. Sorry if you were offended. I am well aware you and ACF have a two way dialogue going on in the politics threads.

Dude, the Daily Mail has no clue about anything Australian. Nor do the the rest of the 'global media.' They followed the pattern of the big news stables in Australia, who deliberately did not report the whole story. All quotes are from Labor politicians. Our media have been complicit in backing the worst government in our short history. Heck, mention the mail to the Brits on this forum, the Sky fanboys and they'll tell you they're not real Brits and have no real voice. It's a cut and paste job, like most of the Mail. I read that specific article the day it came out. Was there a single quote from senator Bernardi? No. Why is that?

Seriously, dude, it's because the article they copied, an Aussie one, was a PR hatchet job. A smear campaign. And the senator made a mistake mentioning two things in the same speech. He opened the door for the Labor phonies to carve him up. As I said, they have no economic policy other than destroy the country, like most lefitist govt's, so they play the person, not the issue. Emotional sway is how they operate and claw back some votes. Doesn't change the fact they're in for the WORST electoral return in history. 30 seats predicted out of 149. Maybe 40 if they get lucky. And that was what the ambassador to the USA told the Republicans and Democrats a few months back. They didn't believe him. Then he said he was the former leader of that party. Catching on yet? They can't win...so they discredit your character. If he'd said this when Howard was in govt, the outcome would have been very different.

BTW, you might want to check what I posted above. I made it very clear I live in New South Wales (NSW). Check my reply to Bro Deal. Not Queensland. Rudd's from that state...why would I want to be from Qld? Or Victoria...Gillard is from there. Howard...from NSW. See what I did there? Tory Wingnuts? We don't have Tories in the Land Down Under. If by tory you mean a person who doesn't need their fingers and toes to count...well I guess that is me. I'm one of the most reasonable people you could meet when it comes to politics. I believe in transparency and accountability. And yes, a sound grasp of macroeconomics. And no, I don't trust Big Business. Nor do I trust popularity seeking politicians. I pretty much sit in the middle, but realise in my country, only the Coalition (Liberals and Nationals) don't destroy our economy. People were a lot more confident under Howard and Costello. Everyone had a chance and we didn't appeal to the sympathy card...feel sorry for me and lets throw money at other people's problems. Like the left do and have done. Check our illegal immigrant problem. Never existed 5 years ago.

As for the Mail being left wing. That's cute. Really cute. They're a gossip magazine masquerading as a formal news paper. Piers Morgan ain't left wing dude. No way. Nor are their articles about the USA, which I read every now and then, in between the gossip of course. Which is why I read the Daily Mail. For the gossip. Honestly, the standard of journalism in the UK universities must be low if the Mail is an indicator. Grammar and language usage is poor. Abysmal sometimes. The reporting on what really happened is worse.

Where to begin? Thanks for the general Oz background. As I said previously, I make no claim to any understanding of politics in your country and only brought up the matter of the senator to tease ACF in what I thought was an entirely light-hearted way.

I reacted to your reply as I did, not because I was in any way offended, but because you did present what I saw as a 'right-wing' defence. As I said, I originally read the story in the Guardian - when I subsequently googled for it I found a whole list of publications with more or less the same story, which tends to substantiate your assertion that the same original story (whether a smear or not) was picked up and reproduced by all foreign media.

My reference to what I normally call the Daily Nazi as being left-wing, was obviously entirely tongue in cheek. I lived in the UK for 18 years, and know all about the general standard of journalism there, as well as about the political preferences of the major papers.

I have highlighted those parts of your reply that I find to be especially contradictory or odd. How can anyone who is trying so hard to appear reasonable claim that 'most leftist' governments have economic policies designed to "destroy" their countries - and yet you rightly distrust big business? Does not compute.

I mentioned 'wing-nuts' by way of hyperbole, since we were in the US politics topic, and I mentioned Queensland not out of any knowledge (or interest) where any particular Ozzie politician is actually from, but because the one thing we foreigners know about Oz is that Queensland is the most right-wing state. It was intended as a light-hearted little dig, but was probably mis-placed, for which my apologies. It was not, and is not, my intention to get into a discussion or argument about Oz politics with you and ACF. I merely mentioned that senator....oh, never mind.

Originally Posted by auscyclefan94
When did I become loony right?.....
................I will put on the record that I largely do not support what the Senator said so people know that I am not the right-wing loony, tory or tea-party sympathiser.

My dear ACF! Perhaps I should have made myself clearer. I simply referred to you as my "go to guy" in a general sense, since I consider you the most serious and knowledgeable guy about Oz politics in general that I 'know' on this forum. I would ask you about right wing loonies and all other persuasions! I would not call you a right wing loony because I know that you are not! Phew.

P.S. I had to c&p this as I stupidly put it into the US topic by mistake. *facepalm*

 

[BroDeal]

I don't understand why the U.S. always has to attack countries made up of worthless deserts filled with brown people and no economy. The people in those countries usually own more guns than socks. Why can't we invade somewhere like Australia? With no guns, the place is pretty much defenseless. Wooden boomerangs won't do much against a phalanx of M1A2s. All we have to do is portray them as socialists spreading their collectivist cancer across Asia, launch Operation Free Kangaroo, and--boom--we'll have more beach front property.

 

[rhubroma]

I think you misunderstood Rhub. I believe he means that it's pretty irrelevant what parties are actually in 'power' in any given western country when the real 'power' and influence in this world is wielded by global banks and financial institutions, whose control and manipulation of the 'markets' determines the context of our existence, wherever we are.

That was exactly my point. According to the precsient contemporary British philosopher, John Grey, in arguing points regarding Anarchic Capitalism and the State: "Nation states must operate in a world in which all options are uncertain...National governments find themselves in environments not merely of risk, but radical uncertainty...Worse, governments often cannot know whether the response of world markets to their policies will be merely to make them costly or to render them completely unworkable...The reduction of leverage of soveriegn states (before the world's financial markets - me) is a symptom of a broader trend, in which the powers gathered by the institutions of the state in early modern times are becoming dispersed or weakened."

Now if we follow up what Grey has said with what Amserhammer has just pointed out, I think we get some indication of what has actually taken place since liberalism has taken over the world. If anything, this news should at least make us somewhat sceptical about globalization and make us wonder if hyperglobalization doesn't become a corporate utopia.

 

[auscyclefan94]

Where to begin? Thanks for the general Oz background. As I said previously, I make no claim to any understanding of politics in your country and only brought up the matter of the senator to tease ACF in what I thought was an entirely light-hearted way.

I reacted to your reply as I did, not because I was in any way offended, but because you did present what I saw as a 'right-wing' defence. As I said, I originally read the story in the Guardian - when I subsequently googled for it I found a whole list of publications with more or less the same story, which tends to substantiate your assertion that the same original story (whether a smear or not) was picked up and reproduced by all foreign media.

My reference to what I normally call the Daily Nazi as being left-wing, was obviously entirely tongue in cheek. I lived in the UK for 18 years and know all about the general standard of journalism there, as well as about the political.

I have highlighted those parts of your reply that I find to be especially contradictory or odd. How can anyone who is trying so hard to appear reasonable claim that 'most leftist' governments have economic policies designed to "destroy" their countries - and yet you rightly distrust big business? Does not compute.

I mentioned 'wing-nuts' by way of hyperbole, since we were in the US politics topic, and I mentioned Queensland not out of any knowledge (or interest) where any particular Ozzie politician is actually from, but because the one thing we foreigners know about Oz is that Queensland is the most right-wing state. It was intended as a light-hearted little dig, but was probably mis-placed, for which my apologies. It was not, and is not, my intention to get into a discussion or argument about Oz politics with you and ACF. I merely mentioned that senator....oh, never mind.



My dear ACF! Perhaps I should have made myself clearer. I simply referred to you as my "go to guy" in a general sense, since I consider you the most serious and knowledgeable guy about Oz politics in general that I 'know' on this forum. I would ask you about right wing loonies and all other persuasions! I would not call you a right wing loony because I know that you are not! Phew.

Fair enough. Sometimes context gets thrown out the window in a forum.

 

[rhubroma]

I guess you would find it annoying not being able to vote.

How could that possibly work as I don't understand how such a Parliament could operate? Australia has a 'hung parliament' like you guys will have and there is enough in-fighting between the two left wing parties, let alone two ideologically opposed parties.

When was the last time that a Party achieved an absolute majority in your Parliament?

A while back, somewhere in this forum, I wrote about precisely what you describe: namely, what seems to be the most capricious vice of all left wing politics - in Australia, as in Italy, in France as in Britain - which is an eternal propensity toward division and internal polemics.

Now in that piece I had said that I wish the left would be a little more concrete, at times even think less nobly when solidarity is demanded in blocking the opposition. At the same time I realize that no political faction can de-nature itself, lest it becomes something it is not.

What then can we say about the right? Well it seems to me their chief characteristic is living in the total absence of any doubt. It makes the world (and maintaining a political policy line) a heck of a lot less complicated, but I'm always extremely wary of certainty and simplicity. It also means that in the face of all evidence to the contrary, they have little difficulty in remaining compact and to be cynically intransigent in defending that which even they know to be filamentary.

 

[rhubroma]

I think you misunderstood Rhub. I believe he means that it's pretty irrelevant what parties are actually in 'power' in any given western country when the real 'power' and influence in this world is wielded by global banks and financial institutions, whose control and manipulation of the 'markets' determines the context of our existence, wherever we are.

In the meantime the protests have returned at the agora of Athens. Complete with beautiful Molotov flames. Lots of folks, an ample segment of Greek society has participated full of women, youth and indeed all ages, against the news that the government has announced another 12 billion in cuts over the next 2 years. It’s possible that the Greek government, which has zero prestige and is bound by the dictats of the international banking community, has tried to utilize the moment as leverage in its negotiations with the “troika.” In fact the troika, composed as it is by political orders of the US led IMF and by the Central European Bank, isn’t at all interested in negotiating and in the middle of which floats the Greek parliament without any autonomy.

Over the past days while the troika inspectors were at work, the numbers were released on how much blood needed to be taken from the Greek working class, which varied from 11. 7 billion according to the Samaras plan to 17-20 or even 30 after Christine Legarde’s and of Spiegel’s estimates, or whomever is the latest well intentioned. In the meantime data has been published regarding how much state workers versus independent businessmen, the numbers being substantially equivalent at 2.5 million, contribute fiscally respectively: 80 billion (the former), 3 billion (the latter). A recent study by the University of Chicago on private debt of the Greek free businessmen has stated that just to pay the state workers back, they’d have to give 120% of their declared earnings!
Me thinks something is awry.

Now I understand that the Greek political class has been corrupt to the gills, though it was financial firms like Goldman Sachs that enticed the Greek state to borrow more money in an effort to grow themselves out of debt according to the neoliberal ideology, which of course lends credence that growth has been the problem, so it cannot be the solution to capitalism’s current malaise. Consequently, if I were one of the Greek state job workers who has had every euro taken out of his paycheck and paid all my taxes, I think I’d be one of those in the Athenian crowd. Furthermore, I’d be pretty damn ****ed at the so called free market business community, the politicians and firms like Goldman Sachs.

I'd also realise - and those Greeks do relaize - that democracy and the very concept of the sovereign state have become the minions of corporate finanace and the IMF, which basically means a total sham. Now if there were any doubts about the Masters of the Universe of global finance commanding over the sovereign state in this capitalist world of today, Greece should alleviate them for us. Hell in Italy the Italian political class appointed, undemocratically, an ex-Goldman Sacks guy to the prime ministry, Monti. What is an Obama or a Holland to do before that.

Greece would be easy to fix, if the financial banks would lower the interest rates. But the Masters of the Universe would never agree to that. Mors tua vita mea.

 

[Zam_Olyas]

Iran lifts block on Gmail a week after barring access to Google's popular email service.

 

[blutto]

...here is a little something that puts into question the validity of one of the wrong wing's favourite policy planks...

http://truth-out.org/news/item/11862-no-evidence-that-high-end-tax-cuts-help-the-economy

Cheers

blutto

 

[Amsterhammer]

ACF - you'll be relieved to hear that Wilders has 'postponed' his visit to Oz until next Feb. He also finds it inexplicable and inexcusable that he has not been issued a visa (yet).

 

[auscyclefan94]

ACF - you'll be relieved to hear that Wilders has 'postponed' his visit to Oz until next Feb. He also finds it inexplicable and inexcusable that he has not been issued a visa (yet).

Yet the Government lets this guy in who has organised violent protests about Islam. Taji Mustafa is a member of Hizb ut Tahrir.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mZpbad2287A&feature=plcp

He is someone who wants the world run under one government which supports Sharia Law and is very anti-western. If he can come into Australia, so can Mr Geert Wilders.

UPDATE: Just this morning, news has come through that Wilders will be coming to Australia as the immigration Minister is not blocking his visa.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...e-for-visit-visa/story-fn9hm1gu-1226486184327

 

[auscyclefan94]

In Australian political news, a right wing commentator and a right wing politician (coincidentally is the man who wants Wilders to Australia) say some unsavoury comments and the Labor Party, some sections of the media and twitter (which we all know is predominantly left-wing) go ape ****. When some left-wing commentators make many unsavoury comments make unsavoury comments about right-wing politicians, much of the media, ALP and Twitter are dead silent on the issue. If/When Abbott comes PM (I think he will), he is going to face a tirade of abuse from Twitter which I believe little will be said about it. It is already happening with the 'women-hating' comments about Abbott and the misandry from the females in the ALP. Greg Hunt hits the nail on the head.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opi...-is-hypocritical/story-e6frg6zo-1226486136052

 

[Amsterhammer]

In Australian political news, a right wing commentator and a right wing politician (coincidentally is the man who wants Wilders to Australia) say some unsavoury comments and the Labor Party, some sections of the media and twitter (which we all know is predominantly left-wing) go ape ****. When some left-wing commentators make many unsavoury comments make unsavoury comments about right-wing politicians, much of the media, ALP and Twitter are dead silent on the issue. If/When Abbott comes PM (I think he will), he is going to face a tirade of abuse from Twitter which I believe little will be said about it. It is already happening with the 'women-hating' comments about Abbott and the misandry from the females in the ALP. Greg Hunt hits the nail on the head.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opi...-is-hypocritical/story-e6frg6zo-1226486136052

Surely you know by now that the western media in general, with the exception of the evil empire that is Fox/Sky, is secretly contolled by global left-wing ('liberal' in US speak) interests, whose main goal is to ridicule and deny a platform to the right?

 

[auscyclefan94]

Surely you know by now that the western media in general, with the exception of the evil empire that is Fox/Sky, is secretly contolled by global left-wing ('liberal' in US speak) interests, whose main goal is to ridicule and deny a platform to the right?

Hey, we have lots of newspapers owned by Murdoch as well! Plenty of people cry out right-wing conspiracies of the sort as well!

 

[auscyclefan94]

I use to think that US Politics had the worst quality debate. I am not starting to think that Australia is taking over that crown. We now have people in the media accusing people of using a miscarriage of a baby and a death of a father to score political points. Sometimes I think that it is the media that causes this mess.

http://www.thepunch.com.au/articles/A-gross-miscarriage-of-taste/

 

[auscyclefan94]

If someone actually comes on this thread from GB, it would be interesting to know what they think of John McTernan, former adviser for the British Labour Party. He has now become the Australian PM"s adviser.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...-war-tony-abbott/story-fn59niix-1226480126399

Coincidentally, he tried the same class warfare and "he hates women" smears on David Cameron as he is doing on Tony Abbott.

 

[Amsterhammer]

Here ACF, is that your boy who was so publicly chastised for being a misogynist and sexist?

I'd never actually seen your PM in action before, thought she was pretty, er, ballsy.

 

[auscyclefan94]

Here ACF, is that your boy who was so publicly chastised for being a misogynist and sexist?

I'd never actually seen your PM in action before, thought she was pretty, er, ballsy.

If she was Pinocchio in that speech, her nose would have grown unbelievably long. This pathetic game of using gender as a way to score political points is a new low for Australian politics. I also should remind you that during that speech, she defended a Speaker who she put into office and who made vulgar text messages. Maybe I should post some of the things that our PM defends.

Peter Slipper to his chief of staff...

"LUCY is very available and keen! Could turn you from your wayward ways (being gay),"

"Brough is a c..t, ''Funny how we say that a person is a c..t when many guys like c..ts.''

''They (vaginas) look like mussell (sic) removed from its shell. Look at a bottle of mussel meat. Salty C..ts in brine.''

"Been to thw (sic) fish shop yet to buy the bottle of shell less Mussells (sic)?''

"Yes i agree she did push it too far. But did she do it because you're mates or she's just an ignorant botch (sic)?'' - said about another MP

The ALP voted to defend this man who had not been Speaker for years yet was getting paid for it. He retired later that day.

It would be interesting to dig up her past on here. Firstly, when she was President of the Australian Students Union (AUS), she and the union supported the idea that wives in marriage are prostitutes. That is a fact. Allegedly she has also said that "old people don't vote for us", so why should we help them.

 

[movingtarget]

I use to think that US Politics had the worst quality debate. I am not starting to think that Australia is taking over that crown. We now have people in the media accusing people of using a miscarriage of a baby and a death of a father to score political points. Sometimes I think that it is the media that causes this mess.

http://www.thepunch.com.au/articles/A-gross-miscarriage-of-taste/

Political correctness is killing debate in Australia. I work in a government office and I get to see the idiocy on a daily basis.

 

[movingtarget]

Our wonderful Gillard government have just successfully voted for an amendment to have sole parents taken off the Sole Parent pension when their child turns eight. They then start receiving Unemployment Benefits which are $100.00 less per fortnight. This will supposedly save the govt 700 Million a year. This is the govt who is working for Australian families or so they say, repeatedly. Obviously they want more people living on the streets. If these people are struggling now what happens when they lose $100.00. They want them to apply for for non existent jobs. The sooner Gillard is gone, the better. She is a fraud. I hope that remark was not sexist !