If Julia Gillard had not run up the deficit by overseeing a series of unproductive non-value adding projects which has drained the Treasury without building the tax revenue potential to pay for what they cost, had she not created an immense level of debt where none had existed before, had she not fatally weakened our border protections by dismantling the system that had been carefully put in place by John Howard, had she not brought in a carbon tax after promising in the week before the election that she would not, had she not introduced the NBN that is likely to make our communications system far worse than if she had merely left it entirely alone, and had she not decided to direct the media so that she will not have to read criticisms of her policies over the Weetbix in the morning, I might have had a different view of both her policies and her persona. But if she believes that either Tony Abbott or anyone else would have been happy had a male done all of this instead, then she is exactly as deluded as I actually think she is.
I have an article at Quadrant on Line under the title, Gillard’s Feminine Mystique which looks at the destructive politics of personal slander that, because of Gillard, now dominates the Labor approach to avoiding having to deal with actual issues.
Because there is not a single policy or decision that has not turned absolutely sour on her, causing the polls to indicate a Labor wipeout at the next election, Julia Gillard has, it seems, decided to scrape the bottom of the political barrel by arguing that the Leader of the Opposition is not merely a sexist – that is, someone who believes women are different from men and for that reason might take different roles in society – but is a full flown misogynist – an actual hater of women and womankind. She is thus poisoning political debate by dragging in arguments which, aside from being beside the point on every major issue of significance, are also absolutely untrue. That she cannot distinguish between:
(a) I don’t like your policies
(b) I don’t like you because of what you stand for, and
(c) I don’t like you because you are woman
is merely par for the course given how obtuse she has shown herself to be in every other regard. By invoking (c) when what is being said is (a) is, moreover, destructive of politics and political debate, creating animosities where none had existed before while obscuring the issues that are doing such great harm. Pandering to the worst instincts and dredging up the badge of victimhood merely for her own political advantage, she is debasing our Parliamentary political debates.
My article at QoL deals with Gillard burrowing into this pile of dirt because for her it is the only answer she has to the criticisms she so rightly receives. Since Little Miss Perfect cannot believe she is personally at fault about anything, the flaw must lie within her critics. That is what my article tries to say. Here is one para and you can go to QoL if you would like to read the rest:
For someone such as myself, who felt as strongly and positively about Margaret Thatcher as I did about Ronald Reagan, the notion that behind my disgust at the policies of such an astonishingly incompetent Prime Minister as Gillard has proven to be are attitudes based on her sex is both insulting and ridiculous. But for her such beliefs are a talisman that protects her from every criticism since she never has to take them seriously because to her they are based on biological facts, not on her personal incompetence.
But given the ways of the ALP, the media and of much else, this is an issue that is likely to play out right up to the next election, which cannot come soon enough.