Is this the end of the Greens? The post-WA Election Bump

[smokingjacket]

i'm convinced alot of green's voters have never actually read their policies. Particularly on the Military.

The Peace and Security policy section isn't as bad as some of the policy material I've seen in there before but still quite a few completely delusional IR ideas. To be fair to them, some of these ideas have been practiced at the nation state level as part of the non-aligned movement but I think many of the ideas of "moral power" were shown to have severe limitations, particularly when dealing with China ala Nehru. Were you referring to anything in particular?

 

[Belnakor]

The Peace and Security policy section isn't as bad as some of the policy material I've seen in there before but still quite a few completely delusional IR ideas. To be fair to them, some of these ideas have been practiced at the nation state level as part of the non-aligned movement but I think many of the ideas of "moral power" were shown to have severe limitations, particularly when dealing with China ala Nehru. Were you referring to anything in particular?

stuff like this "The closure of all existing foreign bases and joint defence facilities on Australian territory and an end to foreign troop deployment, training and hosting on Australian territory." is just clearly a pot shot at the US (the greens hate everything about the US) and if you want to reduce military spend that is obviously the way you would do it... someone has to be defending our borders..

 

[smokingjacket]

stuff like this "The closure of all existing foreign bases and joint defence facilities on Australian territory and an end to foreign troop deployment, training and hosting on Australian territory." is just clearly a pot shot at the US (the greens hate everything about the US) and if you want to reduce military spend that is obviously the way you would do it... someone has to be defending our borders..

I thought that was one of the more realistic policies. You can argue the toss about whether the US/Aus relationship is a net positive for Australia but there's no doubt that it's unusual for a country to have so much of it's self defence capability in the hands of a foreign power.

Civil society organisations, including ethnic and women's groups, should be fully involved in conflict prevention, peacemaking and post-conflict reconstruction.

I quite liked the idea of sending a group of feminists and our most reactionary and identity obsessed third-gen immigrants to participate in conflict prevention and peacekeeping. LMAO

 

[Belnakor]

I thought that was one of the more realistic policies. You can argue the toss about whether the US/Aus relationship is a net positive for Australia but there's no doubt that it's unusual for a country to have so much of it's self defence capability in the hands of a foreign power

yeah but it also goes as far as saying "foreign troop deployment, training and hosting on Australian territory" so we couldn't do ANY joint training activities with say, the Indonesian government or even NZ forces. Makes no sense.

 

[smokingjacket]

yeah but it also goes as far as saying "foreign troop deployment, training and hosting on Australian territory" so we couldn't do ANY joint training activities with say, the Indonesian government or even NZ forces. Makes no sense.

It does too, I missed that. Even when Japan had their constitutionally limited self-defence force they frequently participated in joint training activities for all sorts of reasons. Would be extremely difficult to have a Navy under those conditions, which now I think about it might not be the worst thing. lol

 

[Power Raid]

Worth a read
https://greens.org.au/policy-platform

I like many of the ideas but they simply don't understand how to apply their policies in a real life setting.

ie indigenous policy - the very first principle is wrong, calling for the constitution to recognise indigenous rights to land and water. Most year 5s would understand the federal constitution is a document setting out the power of the federal government. It is not and should not be a document setting out relationships between race and their rights. We have separate bodies of legislation for this.......and fortunately no bill of rights, especially a racist bill of rights.

I think we all want to see indigenous groups succeed but the calls to introduce Mabo are a few decades late, calls for rights to land and water is Mabo and much of the remaining is simply reverse racism.

This is failure to execute is a consistent theme of the greens. I'm not sure if it is by design to be the "loony" emotional option that will never be implemented or just incompetence. but image how powerful the greens could become with better execution! but until then, they are justthe left version of One Nation

 

[Forward Press]

I like many of the ideas but they simply don't understand how to apply their policies in a real life setting.

ie indigenous policy - the very first principle is wrong, calling for the constitution to recognise indigenous rights to land and water. Most year 5s would understand the federal constitution is a document setting out the power of the federal government. It is not and should not be a document setting out relationships between race and their rights. We have separate bodies of legislation for this.......and fortunately no bill of rights, especially a racist bill of rights.

I think we all want to see indigenous groups succeed but the calls to introduce Mabo are a few decades late, calls for rights to land and water is Mabo and much of the remaining is simply reverse racism.

Canada's constitution explicitly recognises the rights of indigenous peoples, so I don't know why you're resorting to the 'even a Year 5 understands a federal constitution should blah blah blah'.

The recognition of indigenous people in our constitution would not be unprecedented, and the symbolic value cannot be understated.

Did you have an issue with Kevin Rudd saying sorry?

 

[King Brown]

Canada's constitution explicitly recognises the rights of indigenous peoples

Doesn't help them much, indigenous Canadians have insane rates of suicide.

https://www.theguardian.com/inequal...n-stop-canadas-first-nations-suicide-epidemic

Empty symbolism achieves nothing.

 

[Power Raid]

Canada's constitution explicitly recognises the rights of indigenous peoples, so I don't know why you're resorting to the 'even a Year 5 understands a federal constitution should blah blah blah'.

The recognition of indigenous people in our constitution would not be unprecedented, and the symbolic value cannot be understated.

Did you have an issue with Kevin Rudd saying sorry?

Re saying sorry, I had no "issue" but value actions over words.

but again enshrining racism in our constitution is a silly move and has no place in the modern day. The document should be limited and preserved for proper purpose being providing or limiting power to the government.

 

[samFFC]

Yes, it is true.

That lasted two years, after the Greens had sided with Tony Abbott to undermine the political capital of the ETS, which was at its maximum in 2009. By 2011, when the carbon tax was introduced, it has lost all goodwill from the public, and the deal between Gillard and Brown was seen as dirty, unfairly or not.

Next thing you know, Abbott gets elected and we have no climate mitigation policies. Thanks Greens!

A toothless policy = no policy. The deal was a good policy, regardless of how it was seen. No point keeping your hands clean if the policy is crap.

 

[samFFC]

i'm convinced alot of voters have never actually read their policies. Particularly on the Military.

EFA.

Also:

1. Genuine security rests on cooperation, fair economic and social development, environmental sustainability, and respect for human rights, rather than on military capabilities.
2. Non-violent conflict management is the most effective means of promoting peace and security in the international arena.
3. United Nations-mandated military action should be a last resort and can only be justified if it is necessary either to avert a major violation of human rights or attempted genocide, or to counter the military invasion of a country.
4. Civil society organisations, including ethnic and women's groups, should be fully involved in conflict prevention, peacemaking and post-conflict reconstruction.
5. Conscription has no place in a democratic society.
6. The deployment of Australian Defence Forces (ADF) must be for defence and peace-keeping, and not for offensive action.
7. No nuclear armed or powered forces should be deployed within Australia's maritime boundaries.
8. The deployment of Australian military forces overseas must require the approval of federal parliament.
9. The use and promotion of violence against civilians or elected governments or representatives, whether perpetrated by a state, an organisation or individuals, should be rejected as a means to achieve political ends.
10. Involvement in military actions has broad and long lasting consequences, including economic and social costs to those directly involved, their families and the broader community.
11. Veterans and their families face unique financial, employment and health challenges which require strong policy responses.

What is/are the points of concern exactly?

 

[samFFC]

I like many of the ideas but they simply don't understand how to apply their policies in a real life setting.

ie indigenous policy - the very first principle is wrong, calling for the constitution to recognise indigenous rights to land and water. Most year 5s would understand the federal constitution is a document setting out the power of the federal government. It is not and should not be a document setting out relationships between race and their rights. We have separate bodies of legislation for this.......and fortunately no bill of rights, especially a racist bill of rights.

I think we all want to see indigenous groups succeed but the calls to introduce Mabo are a few decades late, calls for rights to land and water is Mabo and much of the remaining is simply reverse racism.

This is failure to execute is a consistent theme of the greens. I'm not sure if it is by design to be the "loony" emotional option that will never be implemented or just incompetence. but image how powerful the greens could become with better execution! but until then, they are justthe left version of One Nation

Sorry you lost me at reverse racism.


Also what evidence do you have for the assertion they can't apply policies in real life?
At least the minor parties (Greens included) have a majority of representatives who have held down other roles in the 'real world' previously.
For the Greens that includes Medicine (Di Natale), Teaching (Bartlett), Science (Siewert), Law (Bandt), Farming (Milne) etc..

What percentage of 'real world' politicians in the ALP/Coalition have held down 'real world' jobs prior to their entering parliament?

 

[TimmeT]

Sorry you lost me at reverse racism.


Also what evidence do you have for the assertion they can't apply policies in real life?
At least the minor parties (Greens included) have a majority of representatives who have held down other roles in the 'real world' previously.
For the Greens that includes Medicine (Di Natale), Teaching (Bartlett), Science (Siewert), Law (Bandt), Farming (Milne) etc..

What percentage of 'real world' politicians in the ALP/Coalition have held down 'real world' jobs prior to their entering parliament?

Turnbull, Cash, Bishop, Dutton, Entsch, Gee, Taylor, Andrews, Van Manen, Gillespie There is 10 off the top of my head from the coalition.

 

[Power Raid]

Sorry you lost me at reverse racism.


Also what evidence do you have for the assertion they can't apply policies in real life?
At least the minor parties (Greens included) have a majority of representatives who have held down other roles in the 'real world' previously.
For the Greens that includes Medicine (Di Natale), Teaching (Bartlett), Science (Siewert), Law (Bandt), Farming (Milne) etc..

What percentage of 'real world' politicians in the ALP/Coalition have held down 'real world' jobs prior to their entering parliament?

Do you believe government should be there to govern for all Australians or some?

Let’s start with a practical question.......when does an indigenous bloodline cease being indigenous? Half cast, quarter? Or is it how they feel?

But regardless of detail, the place to enshrine this is in law and NOT the constitution.

 

[Power Raid]

Sorry you lost me at reverse racism.


Also what evidence do you have for the assertion they can't apply policies in real life?
At least the minor parties (Greens included) have a majority of representatives who have held down other roles in the 'real world' previously.
For the Greens that includes Medicine (Di Natale), Teaching (Bartlett), Science (Siewert), Law (Bandt), Farming (Milne) etc..

What percentage of 'real world' politicians in the ALP/Coalition have held down 'real world' jobs prior to their entering parliament?

oh and good on the Greens for holding down real jobs! I think it is extremely important we introduce minimum standards for political aspirants. Holding down real jobs outside of the commonwealth, outside of lobby groups or consultants to lobby groups, experience away from Canberra.

In addition to the real job test we should have an IQ test, an ongoing integrity assessment and the requirement for our politicians to remain anonymous. Politics is about policy not personality.


The integrity assessment/ commission is a greens idea. It was a fabulous idea but sadly the greens dropped the idea as it might have been a rod for their own back.

 

[Belnakor]

oh and good on the Greens for holding down real jobs! I think it is extremely important we introduce minimum standards for political aspirants. Holding down real jobs outside of the commonwealth, outside of lobby groups or consultants to lobby groups, experience away from Canberra.

Definitely agree. Holding real jobs should be a minimum qualification and for example, you should not be able to nominate for a preselection if you have worked for an MP in the past 5 years. Things like that make alot of sense.

I do however have problems with people who are parachuted in or are a celebrity candidate. Most of them are as bad as the "party hacks" since they are generally in parliament for their own ego and normally have little in common with the party they claim to represent.

In addition to the real job test we should have an IQ test, an ongoing integrity assessment and the requirement for our politicians to remain anonymous. Politics is about policy not personality.

politics is about policy, elections are about personality.

 

[Power Raid]

If politics was about policy, we wouldn’t have the governments we do. I dare say 90% of Australians want the same thing thus the same/ similar policies.

 

[samFFC]

Turnbull, Cash, Bishop, Dutton, Entsch, Gee, Taylor, Andrews, Van Manen, Gillespie There is 10 off the top of my head from the coalition.

That’s great!
But many still been in Lib Party from Uni days and many haven’t had work prior to MP.

 

[samFFC]

oh and good on the Greens for holding down real jobs! I think it is extremely important we introduce minimum standards for political aspirants. Holding down real jobs outside of the commonwealth, outside of lobby groups or consultants to lobby groups, experience away from Canberra.

In addition to the real job test we should have an IQ test, an ongoing integrity assessment and the requirement for our politicians to remain anonymous. Politics is about policy not personality.


The integrity assessment/ commission is a greens idea. It was a fabulous idea but sadly the greens dropped the idea as it might have been a rod for their own back.

I would expect the Greens would be fine on those fronts.
Agreed it would be a great idea.
And a federal ICAC to maintain the integrity!

 

[samFFC]

If politics was about policy, we wouldn’t have the governments we do. I dare say 90% of Australians want the same thing thus the same/ similar policies.

Very true
Which is why we should label certain people as “loony” when there is a great overlap of agreement in policy!

 

[Power Raid]

I would expect the Greens would be fine on those fronts.
Agreed it would be a great idea.
And a federal ICAC to maintain the integrity!

I'm fairly sure Shorten, Gillard, Ludlum and Dyastari would have issues based on known issues
I'm fairly sure every politician would struggle based on investigation

 

[samFFC]

I'm fairly sure Shorten, Gillard, Ludlum and Dyastari would have issues based on known issues
I'm fairly sure every politician would struggle based on investigation

Good opportunity to draft some new blood!
I think Ludlam/Waters demonstrated the Greens were happy to do the right/legal thing even if it meant they lost two of their best and most popular performers.

 

[Power Raid]

Good opportunity to draft some new blood!
I think Ludlam/Waters demonstrated the Greens were happy to do the right/legal thing even if it meant they lost two of their best and most popular performers.

Nah he knew for 18 months and wasn’t until he was recorded saying “that doesn’t suit my political objective” when asked to cease spreading false information did he first go on health leave.

then conveniently used the excuse of citizenship to step aside, despite the knowledge for at least 18 months, when he was threatened to be exposed.


That makes him not only colourful in his political professionalism with facts but mischievous as well.

In Ludlum’s defence he is just like every other dodgy poli.

 

[Patrick Bullet]

Nah he knew for 18 months and wasn’t until he was recorded saying “that doesn’t suit my political objective” when asked to cease spreading false information did he first go on health leave.

then conveniently used the excuse of citizenship to step aside, despite the knowledge for at least 18 months, when he was threatened to be exposed.


That makes him not only colourful in his political professionalism with facts but mischievous as well.

In Ludlum’s defence he is just like every other dodgy poli.

Again, are you going to provide some evidence for the knew for 18 months claim or are you going to hide again like you did last time I asked?

 

[Power Raid]

Again, are you going to provide some evidence for the knew for 18 months claim or are you going to hide again like you did last time I asked?

Many links have been posted re his knowledge.

He was first challenged in 2014 according to this link

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/blogs/a...e/news-story/3805b5279f755a05938803658f337a59


I also called his departure a good 6-8 months ahead. I thought he was going to go out on the conduct though rather than his contrived excuse.