Actually yes

John Ruddick writing in the SMH calls out (some of) the left for their appalling behaviour since Friday – blaming conservatives for the massacre in New Zealand.

There are two explanations for their motive. Firstly, they know its nonsense but just want to throw mud at conservatives. Normally this would be everyday politicking … but to use such a shocking tragedy for false point scoring is abhorrent.

But the second explanation is worse. Do some in the mainstream left truly believe the mainstream right has some responsibility for Christchurch? Is that what they think of us? Have some elements of the mainstream left whipped themselves up into a self-righteous partisan fury that all tactics are justified in the name of crushing the mainstream right?

If so, they are only moderate versions of the Jacobins in the French Revolution. This unprecedented level of spiteful partisanship rips at the fabric of the great liberal tradition and national unity that has characterised the West for two centuries. Conservatives remain robustly committed to that liberal tradition. After the past week I have less certainty some of our friends in the mainstream left share that commitment.

So to answer that.

Do some in the mainstream left truly believe the mainstream right has some responsibility for Christchurch?

Yes

Is that what they think of us?

Yes

Have some elements of the mainstream left whipped themselves up into a self-righteous partisan fury that all tactics are justified in the name of crushing the mainstream right?

Yes

If so, they are only moderate versions of the Jacobins in the French Revolution.
Why “moderate versions”?
This unprecedented level of spiteful partisanship rips at the fabric of the great liberal tradition and national unity that has characterised the West for two centuries.
Yes. You’ve only noticed the collapse of liberalism now?
Conservatives remain robustly committed to that liberal tradition.
Some of them.

 

This entry was posted in Hypocrisy of progressives, Politics of the Left. Bookmark the permalink.

54 Responses to Actually yes

  1. stackja

    Leftist hate the West? I am shocked!

  2. Dr Fred Lenin

    Who was responsible for knights Hoddle Street shootings? Who was responsibke for the Port Arthus massacre? Couldnt have been extreme right conservatives , they hadnt been invented in those days . Were Hitlers killers extreme right even though they were National Socialists ? Are the thousandsof muslim murderers extreme right ? I do t understand what extreme right is mdo the left?

  3. Ƶĩppʯ (ȊꞪꞨV)

    The left is treasonous and traitorous.

  4. Squirrel

    Some of the public commentary over the last few days seems like a form of controlled hysteria (if that’s not a complete contradiction in terms) – but this sort of thing is not new –

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extraordinary_Popular_Delusions_and_the_Madness_of_Crowds

  5. Delta

    Fred,

    The whole concept of extreme left and extreme right is BS. The idea that somehow Nazis (national socialists) and Communists are on opposite sides of this spectrum is ludicrous as is the notion that dictatorships can similarly be either (extreme) left or (extreme) right. Add to that the premise that somewhere in the middle is a happy medium of freedom then allows socialists (those on the left) to dictate and define the agenda on what conservatives can or cannot say before being accused (usually) of moving into an extreme right camp.

    The real difference between the ideologies is between freedom and control. Into the control group we can lump terrorists, nazis, communists, dictators and socialists etc depending on the amount of control they would exercise. Into the freedom group we can lump libertarians, conservatives (to the extent they truly support freedoms) and probably many many individuals who want to get on with their lives with minimum government interference.

    That I suggest is a much better overview of political differences though if adopted in some way would not lend itself to quick name calling or accusations of bigot or other derogatory terms. A general measure on what was suggested by anyone would then be “Would what you suggest or say increase individual freedom or constrain it?” Then judged accordingly.

    I wish.

  6. Karabar

    There is no question that the gunning down of 100 people in CHCH was abhorrent terrorism.
    Some of our news media have reported the atrocity accurately. On the other hand, the extent to which others politicize it and lay blame as though they can explain the cause is astounding.

    Yet our news outlets fail to mention such atrocities as the annihilation of 12 entire villages of Christians in Nigeria. This occurred over a three week period about nine months ago. 120 were sliced down as they returned home from funerals FOR the deceased.

    All this bloodshed in the name of Islamic expansion.

    https://www.opendoorsusa.org/christian-persecution/stories/a-dozen-christian-villages-in-nigeria-wiped-out-in-four-day-killing-spree/?fbclid=IwAR11iHD_I2jU08586RAW0mw2-2d7D5mXMRdUBYiLHjfrpTYMUCZcK5pQ8Xs

  7. Dr Fred Lenin

    Delta I always compare politics to a clock face ,12 is the middle ground 6 is extreme fascist dictatorship ,so no matter how far left or right you go. You end up at 6. History proves tis to be the case.

  8. CameronH

    It is a sad that conservatives like Ruddick are only just realising this. They are the ones who have turned a blind eye to the march of these totalitarians through our institutions, at least one half the time on their watch, and now they are shocked about it.

    They have been warned about this by numerous people over the decades and are now surprised.

  9. C.L.

    Brendan O’Neill in the same vain at Spiked:

    This media-bashing has got to stop.

    This afternoon, Corbynistas and other activists will protest outside News UK in London. Their beef? They think the newspapers produced in that building, primarily the Sun and The Times, are ‘Islamophobic’ and therefore bear some responsibility for the barbaric racist slaughter in Christchurch last week. This is a new low for the censorious PC left. It is not five years since nine journalists and cartoonists (and three non-journalists) were massacred in France for the crime of being ‘Islamophobic’, shot to death at their desks simply because they mocked Muhammad and were stinging critics of radical Islam. To gather outside the offices of journalists and brand them ‘Islam-haters’ so soon after journalists were murdered for being ‘Islam-haters’ strikes me as quite repulsive. This is the definition of a dodgy protest.

    The finger-pointing at the media in the aftermath of Friday’s slaughter has been chilling.

    He makes the very good point that those naming and shaming “right-wing” journalists are actually imitating the Charlie Hebdo killers.

    Read on

  10. C.L.

    The Liberals had an opportunity here; an opportunity to delineate the borders of sanity and then manfully defend them – against claims and behaviours clearly mad, contrived, exploitative and revolting. Needless to say, they didn’t fight.

  11. Roger

    All of these over the top, identity politics laden reactions – esp. the Muslimas on the Drum and the Marxist activist Withers’s piece declaring all white Australians as in some sense complicit in Christchurch – are exactly what the shooter wanted. Borrowing from IS’s tactic book, his goal was to incite anti-white sentiment so more young men like himself would be radicalised.

  12. Scott Osmond

    “Our friends on the left” Sigh, they aren’t friends ffs how many times do Liberals have to learn this lesson? After a while I begin to suspect that the only reason for conservative inc is to act as a safety break for the left. They have conserved nothing and conceded or lost everything. What has really sickened me is the media vermin dancing in the blood. Even politically unaware friends have noticed the unholy glee of the scum.

  13. Dr Faustus

    Have some elements of the mainstream left whipped themselves up into a self-righteous partisan fury that all tactics are justified in the name of crushing the mainstream right?

    GetUp (W.R. Shorten prop.) has been busy these past few months tagging conservative MPs as “Hard Right”. Sixteen Coalition members have been selected for a spot of ‘spontaneous popular activism’ based on their views on mainstream policy issues:

    …chosen by GetUp for what it considers “out of date” views on climate change, “heartless positions” on immigration policy and those who “blatantly discriminate” on social justice issues.

    The terms Hard Right and Far Right have been widely used as insults/shorthand for yonks and are now being conflated in political discourse with the Alt Right. Language matters, this is a deliberate strategy to shrink the distance between white supremacist nutters and mainstream conservatism.

    I don’t think there any “self-righteous partisan fury” happening here.
    Stone cold strategy.

  14. Empire 5:5

    The manifesto of the alleged shooter clearly identifies him as a thermogeddonist.

    Therefore any individual who espouses thermogeddonism is directly responsible for the outcome.

    When you next catch your colleagues concernfagging at the water cooler about Christchurch, remind them that CO2phobia kills muslims.

  15. jupes

    Do some in the mainstream left truly believe the mainstream right has some responsibility for Christchurch?

    SloMo certainly does. He reckons that a self described conservative-hating, eco-torrorist is “right-wing”. Tarrants only other traits of note are racism and a desire to start a race war, therefore according to SloMo the Liberal Party is more racist and homicidal than Labor.

  16. C.L.

    … racism and a desire to start a race war.

    See also NSW Labor leader Michael Daley.

  17. DM OF WA

    The manifesto of the alleged shooter clearly identifies him as a thermogeddonist.

    The alleged killer correctly identifies overpopulation, in my view, as the primary cause of an impending crisis – rather than global warming.

    Back in the early 70’s population growth, spurred by the infamous Club of Rome report, was perceived by the elites as an impending apocalypse and it became a popular cause amongst the chattering classes much like global warming has become the favoured form of apocalypse today. The elites urged the rest of the world to curtail their reproduction to save the world.

    The original “population bomb” theory was flawed because it failed to take into account the increase in global food production brought about by the so-called “green revolution” in agricultural science.

    Nevertheless, we now face a new population threat. Modern health care advances together with improved communications and transport systems have enabled famine, health and other crises to be more effectively managed by the international community; this has greatly increased the survival rate of infants in Africa and other Thirld World countries. Unfortunately, the social, political and economic systems in those same Third World countries have not advanced to a corresponding degree: indeed they have gone backwards in some countries! Third World population growth is very high because their societies reject contraception for religious and social reasons and the survival rates are now much higher. Their backward societies, terrible economies and corrupt, incompetent political systems ensure that there are not enough jobs for most of their people.

    The result of the current Thirld World population explosion is overconsumption of scarce resources, unemployment, crime, warfare, and most importantly for us, a massive and continually growing population of desperate, angry, uneducated people (mainly young men) migrating to Europe, America and Australasia.

  18. The BigBlueCat

    Just watch The Drum from Monday night …. make up your own minds.

  19. thefrollickingmole

    They just really, really hate “white” people.

    Some are getting over their sense of shame in admitting it, others still need the crutch of “you are a nazi” to justify the hate, but its still there.

    There is literally no leftist “cause” which cant be enhanced by blaming or hating “white” people.

    Heres a selection…
    (none are worth reading but linked anyway)…

    Why climate action is the antithesis of white supremacy
    Rebecca Solnit
    Behind the urgency of climate action is the understanding that everything is connected; behind white supremacy is an ideology of separation

    ….

    I am done shapeshifting into a form of Muslim palatable for people I don’t know
    Haneen Mahmood Martin
    I’ve realised hiding parts of ourselves does not leave us feeling whole, nor does it make us accepted

    ….

    The sadism of white men
    Why America must atone for its lynchings
    Until now, the enforcement of white supremacy through racial terrorism in the form of lynching has largely been unrecognised as part of America’s history

    We hear too many white, male voices on history – let’s have a wider range
    A high-profile conference featuring only white, male speakers was nicknamed the “Stanford sausage fest”. It shows why history must improve its diversity

    We have an entire education/indoctrination system doing its darnedest to vilify stale pale males, having decided its too hard to educate upwards it must cripple the “privileged” group.

    They face no sanction or punishment for this, in fact its lucrative and rewarding to do so in modern Austfailia.

  20. Tel

    Here’s where empiricism comes into operation: the manifesto contained a bunch of very specific descriptions:
    * He did not agree with conservatism, seeing it as equivalent to corporatism (i.e. the Neocon version of conservatism).
    * He called himself an “eco-fascist”.
    * He likes racial purity.
    * He claims affinity with modern China, especially in terms of a strong ethnic majority.

    All of the journalists quickly picked up their “gatekeeper” hats and went on with, “It’s OK for me to read this document, but not OK for you to read … I will tell you what you need to know”. Then they went ahead and systematically misrepresented the points listed above (other than the racial purity which fits their narrative). The NZ government started threatening anyone who checked for themselves (except strangely did not threaten the journalists who admitted to reading this document).

    You don’t get dishonesty like that by accident. These people are paid to tell lies, and in this case you can check this for yourself by simply checking how many of the stories correctly described the “eco-fascist” or even used that term. When people are deliberately dishonest, it’s because they don’t have a real argument, they know they don’t have an argument and they feel that the lies are the best they have to work with. Hence the answer to the first question is “No” they were perfectly aware of their own mud slinging, this could not possibly be an accidental misunderstanding.

    If we saw a random bunch of different interpretations and some discussion about how the “eco-fascist” concept fits into the picture then I would say they are making a genuine effort. We did not see that. We say orchestrated misleading reports, and we continue to see those … even from the papers who are nominally supposed to be selling to a “right wing” audience.

  21. Tel

    The terms Hard Right and Far Right have been widely used as insults/shorthand for yonks and are now being conflated in political discourse with the Alt Right. Language matters, this is a deliberate strategy to shrink the distance between white supremacist nutters and mainstream conservatism.

    Yes, and over time they have cranked it up a bit here and a bit there. A government wanting to have any sort of border controls is now “ultra-nationalist” whatever that means. Very deliberate strategy.

  22. thefrollickingmole

    The nutter was a racist/collectivist greenie.

    Just like Ayn Rand
    Or something.

  23. Nob

    Yes.
    Delta is spot on.

    You are either heading towards more government control and totalitarianism or more individual freedom and responsibility.

    The happiest place is nearer the freedom end.

    Australia is lurching towards the totalitarian end in the name of a lot of spurious causes.
    Environmentalism being the worst false flag, closely followed by Human Rights.
    Nobody cares that the names are how and the actions taken in their name are contradictory.
    It’s not new. Orwell nailed it best back in the 1940s.

  24. yarpos

    Imagine the howls if you said all Muslims are rsponsible for ISIS, yet of course Conservatives are responsible for the NZ shooting. Usual inconsistency, lack of logic and hyperbole.

  25. Leo G

    If so, they are only moderate versions of the Jacobins in the French Revolution.

    Why “moderate versions”?

    Indeed. The general sense of the word “terrorism” has been accepted for centuries as “systematic use of terror as a policy”. There does appear to be a systematic use of the terrorism of the Christchurch mass murder to advance policy objectives of various parties.

  26. stackja

    2GB reports BS says Turkey comment seen in context. ALP agree with Turkey? Or BS as usual having a bit each way?

  27. Overburdened

    Group shaming is part of the process.
    It has been successfully used many times in different circumstances.

  28. candy

    I am not sure why this is a surprise to Prof D. Even Waleed Aly felt inclined to defame the PM on national TV.

    I’m a little disappointed Mr Morrison withdrew the threat to sue Aly. Really, like Tony Abbott talking tough and then folding. Letting the Left accuse them of bad untrue things, just lying down and taking it.

  29. 2dogs

    When partisanship reaches such levels, history shows that the best solution is autonomy for the two sides.
    Consider the Treaty of London, Singapore 1965, or the walls of Belfast.

  30. NuThink

    It belongs to human nature to hate those you have injured.

    Read more at: https://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/tacitus_101027
    Tacitus lived about 2,000 years ago. Nothing has changed.

  31. NuThink

    AMSTERDAM — Voting in provincial elections began in the Netherlands on Wednesday, just two days after a Turkish-born man was arrested over a shooting attack in the city of Utrecht, boosting Dutch populist parties.

    So how does Erdogan of Turkey feel about their kin folk attacking infidels (or just anyone) in the Netherlands?

  32. Nob

    The comments below the SMH article just can’t accept the truth of its wishy-washy premise.
    Just more rubbish about “dog whistles”.

    This braindead trope allows anyone to impute evil intent to anything you say if they don’t like you.

    It also makes anyone branded “far right” a “legitimate target” by dehumanising them.

    Luckily in Australia, the results so far have just been enormous security bills, banning of public speakers, and physical attacks on elected politicians and media commentators.

    Luckily again, by ineffective wimps, albeit celebrated by the left and much MSM.

    They are not trivial costs but could have been worse.

    All fueled by the hysteria being whipped up which insists that any criticism or disagreement is Hate.
    Is an Attack.
    Is “phobia”.

    Really?
    It isn’t.

    For but one example:
    Securing borders and vetting isn’t anti-immigrant.
    It’s the best way to persuade the public to accept immigration, knowing that we are deciding who to accept and who to exclude, not the people smugglers.

  33. Chris M

    Tarrant is just another violent leftist, like a Green / ABC type gone rouge.

  34. Boambee John

    Dr Faustus

    The terms Hard Right and Far Right have been widely used as insults/shorthand for yonks and are now being conflated in political discourse with the Alt Right.

    Time to bring back communist and hard left into the discourse. And rub the fascist left’s nose in the socialist/fascist/environmentalist nexus.

  35. The Beer Whisperer

    I was always a “The Bible is metaphorical” kinda person, but if anything, i’m now more so.

    Nothing encapsulates a metaphorical demon as much as Marxism, and a metaphorical possession as well meaning people totally within its grasp.

    Once captured, all dissenters are automatically evil, which is exactly what we see in real life.

    Leftists followers are the very epitome of possessed souls, unable to be objective due to satanic Marxism controlling what comes out of their mouths.

  36. The Beer Whisperer

    Luckily in Australia, the results so far have just been enormous security bills, banning of public speakers, and physical attacks on elected politicians and media commentators.

    Oh, really?

    The massacre has been used as a pretext to shut down access in Australia, where the atrocity did not occur, to sites that did not even show the massacre, which was its pretext, while those that actually did show the shotting, are left unmolested.

    Facebook streamed the whole thing live, but it’s the likes of 4Chan that get banned.

    FFS, 4Chan is conspiracy central, where they no doubt claimed Christchuch was a false flag, are now firmly convinced it was a false flag to shut them down, upon which they were truly shut down. So now, any doubters on 4Chan are now totally captured conspiracy theorists, of which all western governments are complicit, including our own.

    How does that reduce conspiracy theories and white nationalism? If more go rogue, it will be the very fault of those who pushed them there.

  37. The Beer Whisperer

    Great comments, Tel.

  38. B.A.Lert

    ScoMo led with a right wing jab aimed at Abbot, must be feeling some leadership pressure. Truely appalling how quickly the left can wipe away the crocodile tears and get down and dirty. Through design from the left and gutless stupidity on the right political islam has become a powerful force with both sides of politics happy to demonise anyone or anything to curry favour. The child abuse royal commission showed the political class really don’t care about little girls ,female genital mutualation and forced marrying as I’ve said before there’s no such thing as the far right .

  39. Yohan

    This Christchurch attack is terrible, but its all part and parcel of living in a big city.

    Also, no nationalist or far right person has to answer for the actions of this lone wolf individual.

    Also, despite leaving a manifesto, this person was just mentally ill, the attack was not ideologically motivated.

    Also, since politics and ideology played no part in this attack, therefore its not a terrorist attack, its just an ‘incident’ or a ‘murder’.

    (Did I miss any other excuses they commonly use for every Islamic terror attack?)

  40. Herodotus

    “After the past week I have less certainty some of our friends in the mainstream left share that commitment.”

    Given the past sixty years I have complete certainty that the left is committed to the destruction of western society. It hasn’t happened just in the past week, it has been a slow but certain process. There is no evidence that they have learnt from the past anything more than how to continue and accelerate the process.

  41. Herodotus

    Branco’s cartoon in Tom’s morning roundup is spot on.
    Thanks Tom.

  42. Bruce of Newcastle

    So where’re all the stories about fear of backlash?

    After an Islamist attack the MSM goes nuts with fear of backlash against innocent muslims. Is the MSM at all interested in the threat of backlash against innocent rightwingers?

  43. Snoopy

    Is the MSM at all interested in the threat of backlash against innocent rightwingers?

    Don’t be obtuse, Bruce. There are no innocent rightwingers.

  44. Nob

    The Beer Whisperer
    #2965260, posted on March 20, 2019 at 10:13 pm
    Luckily in Australia, the results so far have just been enormous security bills, banning of public speakers, and physical attacks on elected politicians and media commentators.

    Oh, really?

    The massacre has been used as a pretext to shut down access in Australia, where the atrocity did not occur, to sites that did not even show the massacre, which was its pretext, while those that actually did show the shotting, are left unmolested.

    Fair enough. I wouldn’t know because I don’t have time for that shit.

  45. LBLoveday

    Yesterday in Italy, a Muslim “refugee” immigrant locked 51 children in their school bus and set it alight with the stated intention of, and a realistic probability of, them all being burned to death. All escaped death, in good part because of a mobile phone call to the police who arrived quickly.
    .
    This Muslim is as evil as the Christchurch shooter and his intention basically the same, just less “competent”, but will it even be in tomorrow’s papers or on your ABC, let alone elicit wide condemnation, and if it is, will they even mention that he was Muslim and his targets non-Muslims, as the vast majority of terrorist acts are?

  46. Paulo Nigrum Anatis

    Certainly there is collective responsibility by nations, groups of nations, or regions for what their fighters do and behave when waging war. That collective responsibility ceases for sheer acts of bastardy of an individual only.

    That responsibility rests with that individual and that individual alone for what he decided to do. No one (as far as we know) – unlike his Islamist equivalents – ordered him, cajoled, coerced, conned or directed him to carry out these atrocities. There is nothing directly ‘collective’ about it!

    At this juncture, in the rush to apportion blame and motive, we actually have very little information of real substance to form a cognisant view on this man’s state of sanity, his political beliefs and motive. It’s all attributed and surmised. Only proper investigation and due process will establish that in the fullness of time. Until then objectivity demands we wait before casting aspersions in any direction; when we have all the facts.

    The heinous actions of the Left and media hyenas fuelled in their abhorrent self-serving way to pedal their own hate filled obsession with the centre and right – purely opportunistic; playing it for all its worth as, for example, the ABC has so inexcusably (well, they are funded by all of us) demonstrated since last Friday. How long are the rest of us to be cowed by such an approach? I despair!

  47. Pyrmonter

    @ PNA, LBL

    I rather think you’re missing the point. Principles of liberalism are indivisible; if you wish to hold ‘muslims’ responsible for the actions of ‘Islamists’, you need to accept that collective responsibility works in the other direction as well.

    Much as I admire the general tenor of ‘western civilization’, the catalogue of wrongs wrought by ‘the West’ – the Shoah; the Belgian occupation of Congo; and the Bengali famines of the 1940s; the transportation and institution of African slavery in the Western Hemisphere, to name but a few – is longer than you might be comfortable to accept.

  48. Cynic of Ayr

    The sad thing is that many, many people saw this coming.
    They saw the left infestation of the School system.
    They saw the left infestation of the ABC.
    They saw the left infestation of the University system.
    They saw the left infestation of the Nurses Unions, the Fire Unions, the Building Unions.
    They saw the problem that unfettered islamic immigration was going to cause problems.
    Many spoke out. All were vilified.
    Some Politicians spoke out. A few. All were vilified.
    If they were vilified by only the Left, it might not be a disaster, but significant vilification came from the Right.
    That’s correct. Does anyone really, really assume or believe then the present Morrison Government is a Government of the Right?
    It seems to me, glaringly, that the Right has competed with the Left, on who can be the most outraged by the Christchurch killing. I do not believe – but no real proof – that the Right displays more outrage at Christchurch, that they do any any Islamic terrorist act.
    Governments have failed over the last few years to address a glaring situation in development.
    Labor can be excused, as they saw it as an advantage.
    The Greens can be excused as they are completely brainless.
    The Liberals, and possibly to a lesser extent, the Nationals, have totally failed the nation.
    I am now totally convinced that Morrison, elected or not, is a charlatan. He is noway, nohow, going to do anything like he says he is going to do.
    If Howard and Costello had done a real job, instead of a good looking job, then things might have been different. But neither was brave nor sensible enough to do so.
    Have I heard correctly? The Libs are going to preference the Greens over Hanson?
    Think what you like about Hanson. Any belittling thing you can think of. But Hanson is one thing that the Greens are not. She is an Australian Patriot.
    So now we have the situation where the Left has almost total control over what is said, done, taught and published.

  49. Pyrmonter

    @ Cynic of Ayr

    What claim to freedom from discrimination has someone willing to discriminate against others on account of their beliefs?

  50. Pyrmonter

    Put rather more eloquently:

    ‘Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them: for this is the law and the prophets.’

  51. one old bruce

    “They saw the left infestation of the School system.
    They saw the left infestation of the ABC.
    They saw the left infestation of the University system. …”

    You must be very young and getting your info from the US mobs. Keith Windschuttle points out that a century ago Australia was proud of being thought the ‘most Socialist nation on earth’ by the then current Fabian notions of what ‘socialism’ meant, pre Soviet Union and all that. If you haven’t read Keith Windschuttle then you’re not talking about Australia but some generic American ‘western society’ which is pretty dubious because they were mostly absent from it. Really everyone gets their ideas from the saem dubious sources these days, both left and right, all the cartoons about ‘oppression’ which never existed in the way imagined. No one ‘saw’ anything ‘coming’, and certainly not some sinister ‘leftist infiltration’. Not in Australia, no how. What we did see however was a previously masculine hard knocks nation taken over since the 1960s by feminine squabbling and dubious fairy dust theories. The day Gough got elected was arguably the first time women’s votes made a difference, all the mothers voted for him while the men only did if they were rusted on ALP types. Opposition to the Vietnam war which Whitlam made his platform appealed to mothers mostly. Then the Uni and schools which were previously male dominated were taken over by women during the same time. There are your ‘leftists’. Were we supposed to ban teh wimmienz? It would have kept things from changing as they have, but you try standing up to that mob.

  52. Pyrmonter

    @ One Old Bruce

    What changed was that women’s votes started electing social democrats, not their opponents. Menzies consistently won the women’s vote; it is now almost forgotten that the largest single contributor to the membership of the Liberal Party was the Womens’ National League.

    The difference between the past and now is, I’d suggest, the left is more monolithic. Liberal-conservatives ranging from Joseph Cook to EOG Shann started out on the left, but left it. That was the pattern until until the 1980s, perhaps even the 1990s. What modern example is there? (Lest anyone suggest Latham, he’s always been the candidate of the Poujadists, finding a party to suite)

  53. one old bruce

    Arthur Calwell was Gough’s predecessor leader of the ALP in the 60s. As I’ve pointed out he was saying the same things as Enoch Powell back then. The leader of the ALP was publically arguing for the White Australia policy to get elected PM in the 1960s! And he had a lot of support becuase the ALP was full of WW2 veterans who lived through the threat of an Asian invasion. The Liberals in contrast back then were pro-British multiculturists, bringing Asians in to study. What does ‘leftist infiltration’ even mean in that context?

  54. one old bruce

    Women typically take a while to form their opposition force, look how it took them a decade or so to take over the internet and ‘social media’. They move slowly under daddy’s protection until they feel confident to assert their individuality, which is all fairy dust ‘think of the children’ and tears for psychopaths and bad boys who they’re attracted to. Also they instinctively test males for mating fitness, get them to fight so they can mate with the strongest. Anyone can see this is what their invasion of our public life means. This is what is happening.

    When they had nested well under daddy Menzies and felt secure they went for ‘bad boy’ Gough. Not that awful Calwell who their brothers all supported.

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.