Idiot at large

Professor Gillian Triggs.  What a piece of work she is.

Writing for some obscure internet publication called InnovationAus.com, Professor Triggs writes:

I (Triggs) believe we are living in divisive times.

No Sh*t Sherlock.  Especially coming from someone who has spent a large proportion of her later career seeking to divide us.  But Triggs continues:

In the last few years, however, I think we have started to see an absolute intolerance for expert opinions, reports, inquiries, facts or evidence. There is also a growing need to cater to ideology – to appeal to the worst parts of our nature.

When it comes to opinions, it is not clear to Spartacus why the opinions of experts carry any more weight than the opinions of others.  But the problem is that these “experts” seem to feel that their expertise in one area, usually quite narrow, extends to every nook and cranny.

Consider Noam Chomsky, an expert in linguistics who preaches well beyond this field.  Consider Tim Flannery, a mammalogist and palaeontologist who seems to believe this gives him licence to be an expert in climate.  Consider also Gillian Doreen, an expert in public international law who seems to claim expertise in …. well everything apparently.

Perhaps next time Professor Triggs has a health issue, she should pop over to her local plumber.  After all, the plumber is an expert and can offer her advice.

Irrespective, the arrogance of Triggs seems to have no bound also:

But as a country, we have not been able to turn that information into the policy that we need.

Perhaps she meant to say “the policy I want”, but more likely she assumes that what she wants is what we all need.  But hey.  She is Professor Triggs after all.  And clearly unable to see the problem, Triggs writes further:

I (Triggs) would like to see universities – institutions largely responsible for the political leaders of the future – focus on teaching their students how to make creative decisions based on evidence. They also need to be able to distinguish between fact and fiction.

Complaining about university politician behaviours, Triggs seems to want more university politicians.

These issues have become far more politicised than they should, especially since they are problems that desperately need solutions.

Again Professor Triggs gives it away.  She assume that problems (assuming they are so) require Government solutions.  As Thomas Sowell has repeatedly explained, Government can solve any problem …. by making everything else much worse.

In Professor Triggs’ heart, this is the core problem:

My concern is that the policies being developed are almost rejecting fundamental expert advice.

Moron.  What a moron.  The problem with technocrats (and Spartacus is being very generous to Professor Triggs here) is that they believe that government policies are based on evidence.  If that were so, the size and reach of government would be a fraction of what it is.

Government policies and decisions are based on values and priorities.  For right or for wrong, values and priorities trump every time.  You can’t support pink bats, NBN, HRC and 18c without a shred of evidence and then cry when policies you don’t like have weak evidentiary support.

But how about this from a Professor of Law:

I see very able, well-educated leaders, such as Malcolm Turnbull and Bill Shorten, unable to extricate themselves from the unnecessary political spats of the day.

Yes.  Our political leaders need to extricate themselves from politics.  Perhaps a dictatorial system would be an improvement.

Perhaps Australia should deal with subversive elements like Triggs through closer monitoring.  Sadly you can say what you like around the kitchen table at home and also in a little read internet journal.

Follow I Am Spartacus on Twitter at @Ey_am_Spartacus

Subscribe to the Sparta-Blog at eyamspartacus.wordpress.com

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

28 Responses to Idiot at large

  1. Suburban Boy

    “… I think we have started to see an absolute intolerance for expert opinions …” = The peasants are revolting!

    “Moron. What a moron.” Au contraire, a very intelligent but deeply unwise person who for that reason remains a danger to the public good. At least she no longer has a formal position of power from which to spread her malice.

  2. duncanm

    Australians have always been subject to propaganda, spin and misinformation. In the last few years, however, I think we have started to see an absolute intolerance for expert opinions, reports, inquiries, facts or evidence. There is also a growing need to cater to ideology – to appeal to the worst parts of our nature.

    aka – you lot (the voters) are too stupid and can’t be trusted.

  3. 2dogs

    Expert advice doesn’t determine good policy. Testing does.

  4. Dear Suburban Boy

    At least she no longer has a formal position of power from which to spread her malice.

    Except she has an academic position at the University of Melbourne – hence maintaining the Professor title – thus teaching our children

  5. Craig Mc

    Who is she leeching off these days?

  6. John Constantine

    Why fight elections over policy platforms to decide a country’s future?.

    We can simply sign craven capitulation conventions that mean we will be unwavering in appointing unelected political commissars to be camp commandants of our grey gumptionless gulag.

    Poor fella my country.

  7. iain russell

    Fascism is always attractive. Perhaps Triggs can become ‘duce’? Given her appalling performance as Chief Censor and Inquisitor, she’d be a natural.

  8. Bruce of Newcastle

    In the last few years, however, I think we have started to see an absolute intolerance for expert opinions, reports, inquiries, facts or evidence.

    I agree with her completely. There is vast evidence that dangerous global warming isn’t happening, that socialism is catastrophic, that multiculturalism is disastrous and muslim immigration a dire threat. The Left ignores all this evidence.

    I (Triggs) would like to see universities – institutions largely responsible for the political leaders of the future – focus on teaching their students how to make creative decisions based on evidence. They also need to be able to distinguish between fact and fiction.

    I agree with that too. I wonder when they’ll return to teaching empirical science, actual history and real economics?

    Not soon on evidence of the Ramsay fiasco.

  9. Gary

    This attitude has risen many times before with the same outcome.

  10. Speedbox

    But the problem is that these “experts” seem to feel that their expertise in one area, usually quite narrow, extends to every nook and cranny.

    Yes and it is surprisingly easy to be considered a ‘spokesperson’ or ‘expert commentator’ by most media in Australia. Remember that the Australian media are remarkably lazy. Investigative journalism (beyond, maybe making a phone call) doesn’t really happen any more. The journalists want it served up to them with minimal effort on their part.

    If you can issue a press release quickly, and follow that up with a brief telephone interview, you’re home.
    All the modern journalist needs is a) someone who is prepared to go on record, b) speaks fluently with no ahhhs or umms, c) offers a plausible narrative that the average punter can/will accept and d) it fits into the ‘green’ ‘socially responsible’ or current ‘meme’, all the better. You will almost certainly be quoted in the press, your voice could easily grace the airwaves or, if you hit the TV screens, you societal role as an ‘expert’ is assured. Easy peesy.

  11. .

    The idea of “oh no, we’re divided” is bit of a weak idea, like the idea that John McCain was a “straight-talking maverick who reached across party lines”.

    Why shouldn’t we be divided?

    We want people who protest the stupidity of reality TV, we want people who dig their heels in on free speech and gun ownership and we want free speech regarding immigration policy, family law and so on.

    Chaos is a lot better than conformity.

    Until we’re having a conflict between the Republic of WA and the Commonwealth of Australia, I’m not really worried.

    We were split on Federation, conscription, the depression, nationalisation, Communists, Vietnam, the NWO, neoconservatism, trade, the republic and now immigration & the environment.

    Some people are going to be misinformed and those who are not, thank your stars they exist.

  12. H B Bear

    But the problem is that these “experts” seem to feel that their expertise in one area, usually quite narrow, extends to every nook and cranny.

    A problem most noticeable in doctors and their union, the AMA.

  13. .

    The idea of “oh no, we’re divided” is bit of a weak idea, like the idea that John McCain was a “straight-talking maverick who reached across party lines”.

    Actually, come to think of it, it is a bloody stupid and authoritarian idea.

  14. Boambee John

    I wonder what she thinks of the “experts” who thought they knew what caused stomach ulcers …….. until it turned out that they didn’t?

  15. don coyote

    Perhaps next time Professor Triggs has a health issue, she should pop over to her local plumber. After all, the plumber is an expert and can offer her advice.
    Or ask Johnny, the shoeshine guy https://youtu.be/h_19mxj2LME

  16. LGS

    This incredibly self-opinionated woman has a monstrous sense of entitlement.
    She’s in good company with the likes of Marie Antoinette and Malcolm Turnbull, who regard all us plebeians with enormous disdain and arrogance.

  17. Elle

    Ha! Gillian Triggs – the ex President of the Human Rights Commission, who was not at all morally qualified for the job. I’m reminded of Piers Akerman’s article

    Here

  18. Bruce

    I suspect that Triggs needs a visit from the stewards.

    They will not, however, need any fancy toys or chemistry to pick up the arrogance and hubris.

  19. Norman Church

    Those who believe that experts are best placed to decide how we all should live our lives imagine that the comparison is between the experience and expertise of the so-called expert and the experience and expertise of a single ordinary member of the public.

    This is fallacious.

    In fact, the relevant comparison is between the experience and expertise of the so-called expert and the experience and expertise of millions of ordinary members of the public. The views of the latter will always be infinitely more sound than the former.

    And that would be so even if one were to ignore the fact that many of these so-called experts are ideological drop-kicks who do not know their arses from their elbows.

  20. Rusty of Queensland

    Lets throw in a quota for age groups as well, as there is some idiot professor on the radio saying that 16 year olds should be given the vote. Why stop at 16, and then exclude people over 60 as their out of touch,particularly if they don’t vote Green/Labour. We’l get them to wear a colour patch on their lapels so thet can be rejected at the voting booths if they sneak in.

  21. JohnA

    Norman Church #2814243, posted on September 11, 2018, at 4:30 pm

    Those who believe that experts are best placed to decide how we all should live our lives imagine that the comparison is between the experience and expertise of the so-called expert and the experience and expertise of a single ordinary member of the public.

    This is fallacious.

    In fact, the relevant comparison is between the experience and expertise of the so-called expert and the experience and expertise of millions of ordinary members of the public. The views of the latter will always be infinitely more sound than the former.

    And that would be so even if one were to ignore the fact that many of these so-called experts are ideological drop-kicks who do not know their arses from their elbows.

    Indeed, if Ms Triggs had her way, the jury of twelve would be abandoned in favour of one forensic expert.

    How would you like that, Mike and Lindy Chamberlain?

  22. James Hargrave

    ‘many of these so-called experts are ideological drop-kicks who do not know their arses from their elbows’

    There is (and always has been) a wafer-thin divide at best between an expert and a crank with a cause.

    The Twiggs creature is morally offensive (and I do not concern myself with her public posturings in drawing this judgment).

  23. Des Deskperson

    ‘Au contraire, a very intelligent but deeply unwise person’

    Theoretically intelligent, maybe, but unwise to the point of folly, famous for her easily disproved ‘misstatements’. From Crikey, 21 October 2016:

    “To the glee of her Coalition tormentors, Human Rights Commission president Gillian Triggs has been badly caught out in her evidence to the Legal and Constitutional Affairs estimates hearing earlier this week. Having dismissed quotes attributed to her in an interview with Ramona Koval as “out of context” or “put in by a sub-editor”, Triggs has had to reverse herself when she learned The Saturday Paper had an audio recording of the interview:
    “Upon further reflection I accept that the article was an accurate excerpt from a longer interview.”
    Blaming the journalist — especially a respected one like Koval — was a shabby look, especially given the interview, or at least the edited version that appeared in The Saturday Paper, was a sympathetic one.”

    Crikey, of course, goes on to partially excuse Triggs on the grounds that other people do it, but the fact remains that her ‘misstatement’ was so easy to disprove and that it involved an attempt to discredit someone who was in her side, shows an almost dysfunctional level of stupidity and/or arrogance as well a considerable degree of personal nastiness.

    Her arrogance may have something to do with the fact that both her husbands – first a uni professor and then the Australian Ambassador to France – were much older, powerful and extremely well connected men.

  24. Robbo

    Why won’t that appalling woman just go away and get under a rock and stop lecturing us. She is convinced that she’s the smartest person around and forgets that the rest of us know only too well what a nasty individual she is. Ignoring the reality that most sensible people in Australia loathe her Triggs keeps prattling away as if she matters. The fact is that she doesn’t matter. Most Australians will continue to ignore her just like she ignored her daughter.

  25. Pete of Perth

    Imagine the offspring of Gillian coupling with Turdball

  26. Bruce

    “Imagine the offspring of Gillian coupling with Turdball”

  27. NB

    Gillian? She is just funny. She’s developing a comedy show. She is pitching it to that laugh-a-minute comedy broadcaster that runs dark parodies of news and current affairs shows. Gillian’s Island.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.