Quota me this

Quotas, quotas, quotas.  The theme du jour.  Identity politics in action.

Throwing away any opportunity to give the next Federal election a red hot go, the Liberal has collapsed again into a self inflicted and self indulgent bout of narcissistic introspection.  Forgetting about those they claim to want to represent, the Liberals continue to talk about themselves.  The latest and greatest, gender quotas.

(Interests of disclosure, Spartacus is not a member of any political party.)

Spartacus has written previously of his dislike of the whole left-right political binary construct.  It seeks to oversimplify way too many issues.  But sometimes, this construct is useful to illustrate a point, to wit the general rule of thumb is that the parties of the left are interested in equality of outcome whereas the parties of the right are more interested in the equality of opportunity.

So, if the Liberal Party determines that they should have gender (or any other) quota, that would be an unequivocal surrender to the left.  They will no longer have any claim to being liberal let alone a conservative party.  The game would be up.

The introduction of a quota system is a textbook “equality of outcome” policy.  This is why the Labor Party has such.

If there is something within the DNA, policies or systems of the Liberal Party that discriminates against women, then that blockage should be identified and addressed.  This is what equality of opportunity is.

To implement quotas would be to conclude, without any evidence, that there is a blockage to women and that it is easier to compensate for the blockage rather than finding and dealing with the blockage.  That is equality of outcome.  That is affirmative action.  That is discrimination.  That is just wrong and that is not what a supposed right of centre political party should do anywhere anyhow.

Gender quotas are the thin end of the wedge.  Give it time.  Once the dust settles there will be calls for other quotas – racial, religious, sexual orientation.  It won’t end until Australia is governed by the United Nations.

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.

19 Responses to Quota me this

  1. Fred

    So instead of getting male career politicians that have never had a real job, we will end up with female career politicians that have never had a real job. Yay diversity.

  2. DD

    Does S44 apply to members of parliament so clearly beholden to the United Nations and doing the globalist bidding of that Marxist/mohamedan body?
    Against the national interest of our country and its citizens.
    Did we give them this right?
    Or did they steal it in the night?

  3. Bruce of Newcastle

    How about a quota for male heterosexual Christians?
    I can’t recall seeing any on the ABC or SBS recently.

  4. Roger

    That is affirmative action. That is discrimination. That is just wrong and that is not what a supposed right of centre political party should do anywhere anyhow.

    Ergo…

  5. John Constantine

    Capable conservative women have the world as their oyster, with careers in business open everywhere. Why take a paycut to be a backbencher in opposition and have your kids targets of the left?.

    Left wing activist wymynsys flock to politics instead of business, so there are countless teeming millions of enraged godless childless commo vegan activist women for each job.

  6. H B Bear

    The main argument against female politicians is the near universal quality of them.

    This is also the main argument against male politicians too.

  7. 2dogs

    Sortition is fair

    Certainly a line that we can push in favour of it. All segments of the community will be proportionally represented.

  8. PoliticoNT

    Okay, so once upon a time Liberal members (both member and parliamentary wings) believed you got up on merit. Whether you had a cock or a pussy – you were judged on your competence – or at least that was a key value we all agreed had something to do with preselections. (Machiavellian cunning assisted, we can’t dispute that.). Also, the wider public had long demanded that apart for roles like Special Forces knife fighting, lifting heavy things – whether you had a pussy or a cock made no difference on whether you were any good for politics.

    But now if you have a pussy this means you’re in a special category of uselessness and need someone with a cock (or a possibly even a pussy) to give up their spot on the team for you, even if you’re shit. Pussies and cocks are therefore not equal. So I for one am not going to waste anymore of my personal time on politics and will be donating my party membership fee to Andrew Hastie. Because Mr Hastie is not a pussy.

    What is going to be really fun is when a useless pussy like Anne Ally, or Tanya Plibersek or (see most pussies in Parliament) is challenged by a better pussy for a place at the Golden Parliamentary Trough. Then we will have a PussyFight! We will be told not to use this term, but we will anyway, which will make the pussy-brigade very cross.

    At which point the public will wake up to themselves. And gender quotas along with race, will be banned.

  9. RomeoWhiskey

    +1000.

    This article is spot on, and should be mandatory reading for the entire federal liberal party.

  10. tombell

    why would any woman want to be part of Team Turnbull (correction) Morrison when the party room is full of bullies?

  11. Norman Church

    Sweet gentlefolk, please do not forget that, according to all of the usual suspects, it is unarguably the case any organisation or body is instantly improved by the inclusion of persons other than white males – however vapid, vacuous or venal those persons included might be.

    This is the awesome power of Diversity.

    Truly, there is nothing that Diversity cannot achieve.

    This message is particularly important for those of you who wrongly think that claims about the benefits of Diversity are simply a self-serving justification for the imposition of quotas for the advantage of special interest groups.

  12. In Switzerland a referendum in 1959 to allow women to vote was rejected by 67% (of men). A referendum to allow woment to vote was passed in 1971 but not all states agreed. The last state to agree to allow voted by women was Appenzell (the smallest of states) in 1991. It appears that the lower house of the Federal parliament has now about 32% of 200 members and the upper house (States house) of 46 has 15% women. In state parliaments and district council the number of women is around 24%.
    Switzerland has done well with many or no women in the legislatures. Switzerland does not have the socialist leaning governments of other Europe countries or that matter governments of all countries that have some sort of elections. They are the only country that has direct democracy in which the public can have a say in laws and even on the budget.
    Australia does not need quotas for women but could do with direct democracy so the stupid ideas of socialist feminists can be thrown out. Would it not be good to chuck out the discrimination act and the ministry of women.?

  13. .

    Would it not be good to chuck out the discrimination act and the ministry of women.?

    Of course.

  14. DaveR

    Its the failed American Equal Opportunity push all over again. It did a lot of damage first time around.

  15. NuThink

    @cementafriend True, the other reason that the Swiss system of CIR is better is that the people vote on issues which affect them, and they are not all lumped together in one big stew. Our system is like going to a soup kitchen and getting table d’hôte whereas the Swiss system actually allows choice à la carte. And you can select what is on placed the carte.

  16. destroyer D69

    I prefer to be governed by a parliament with functioning organs between the ears not selected by the posession of mandated specific organs between the legs

  17. Ms Smith

    tombell

    #2814209, posted on September 11, 2018 at 3:34 pm
    “why would any woman want to be part of Team Turnbull (correction) Morrison when the party room is full of bullies?”
    What are you talking about? There has been no evidence of bullying in the party room. You are listening to the liars on the LEFT, and the women that have come forward have been Turnbull supporters!

  18. jupes

    So, if the Liberal Party determines that they should have gender (or any other) quota, that would be an unequivocal surrender to the left.

    They surrender to the left as soon as they “Of course, we want more women”. Which they all do.

    Why?

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.