Joined: Aug 19, 2009
Posts: 534
Location: Aussie Prawn Facility; District 10
Posted:
Wed Aug 18, 2010 1:21 am
I suppose you would all like an update on the Australian elections (yeah we are having an election, our female, atheist prime minister who got the job via political hatchet job is up for election and she's caving in to the religious lobbies so fast it isn't funny). BTW, this is a
real
party. I'm torn as to who to vote for... these guys or the Secular Party. Damn!
(the video title is a parody of the now defunct 'work choices' legislation which was about anything but choices...)
_________________ I take the awe of understanding over the awe of ignorance, any day... - Douglas Adams
FullMentalJackpot The Learned
Joined: Jan 11, 2008
Posts: 109
Posted:
Wed Aug 18, 2010 4:51 am
Lobbiests and special interests tend to win in political contests vs voters bcs of incentive problems with regards to teh value of a vote vs the value of rents lobbies can accrue by capturing regulators or politicians.
DigitalAtheist Graduate Thinker
Joined: Apr 13, 2009
Posts: 661
Location: Canada
Posted:
Wed Aug 18, 2010 7:34 am
Hmm… I had high hopes for Gillard, who seemed like a straight talker. (Mind you, we have a bit of a removed perspective from this geographic distance.)
How is she caving to religious lobbies?
_________________ Be very, very careful what you put into that head, because you will never, ever get it out. - Cardinal Wolsey
iPondR Graduate Thinker
Joined: Aug 19, 2009
Posts: 534
Location: Aussie Prawn Facility; District 10
Posted:
Wed Aug 18, 2010 9:30 pm
FullMentalJackpot wrote:
Lobbiests and special interests tend to win in political contests vs voters bcs of incentive problems with regards to teh value of a vote vs the value of rents lobbies can accrue by capturing regulators or politicians.
Indeed, although this system is not assymetric, the political machines are also subject to the poll-makers and the media... all the while the politicians and their staffs (emplyoees, not the moses or gandalf type ) are also aware of the distorting effects of lobby groups and do indeed engage in an arbitrage of playing off one political force against another.
For example, I'm sure there are many on the left in Oz who would love to 'let Julia be Julia' but the stakes in this election are high due to the way in which she obtained her position... [see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julia_Gillard#Prime_Minister ] therefore there was not the solid incumbent posittion to fall back on (they almost always win in this country)... so a good deal of pandering to religious lobbies etc. appears inevitable.
Her predecessor 'K.Rudd' was a self-professed good christian and this put him in good stead in his home state of Queensland (nothing to do with effeminate males BTW) and it's demographic of right wing loonies (I exaggerate!) anyhow to cut a long story short some pandering to the religious lobbies (who are not as powerful as in the US) would most likely avert political suicide with a significant slice of the voters.
Examples of 'pandering' include giving money ($20K or 30? not sure) per annum to have a chaplain type character in every public school (we don't have the same constitutional protections) a move which has been criticised in the ABC (our PBS) and also having to kiss and play nice with K. Rudd to appease his former supporters and appear not so 'anti-religion' (a false accusation). She also had to slightly back away from being so up-front about not believing (what a phrase that is) even though she was clear that she respected the beliefs of others. In my view an EXCELLENT position for a political leader. Who wants the opposition (ie sectarian) to be in charge!
The other main problem is that the opposition leader (we too have a duopoly in this country) is a former monk (!?!) [see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tony_Abbott#Early_life_and_family ] (amusing!! there is a Canadian pollie called Tony Abbott) - well he has no problem putting his Catholicism out there for all to see (although there's bound to be a fundamentalist-kook lobby who take objection to Catholics, in addition to the secularists etc.)
So, I guess D_A that also answers your question. Roll out the Pork Barrels! No time for integrity, they have an election to win. I DO NOT envy their campaign managers right now...
_________________ I take the awe of understanding over the awe of ignorance, any day... - Douglas Adams
DigitalAtheist Graduate Thinker
Joined: Apr 13, 2009
Posts: 661
Location: Canada
Posted:
Wed Aug 18, 2010 10:46 pm
It's perhaps not a bad idea for a politician to say, "It's really not important enough to discuss," re: their personal religion. But the school chaplain sort of causes my gullet to rise a bit. Oh dear!
Yes, let the election carnival begin! Best of luck to the most sane of the lot.
_________________ Be very, very careful what you put into that head, because you will never, ever get it out. - Cardinal Wolsey
FullMentalJackpot The Learned
Joined: Jan 11, 2008
Posts: 109
Posted:
Wed Aug 18, 2010 10:57 pm
iPondR wrote:
FullMentalJackpot wrote:
Lobbiests and special interests tend to win in political contests vs voters bcs of incentive problems with regards to teh value of a vote vs the value of rents lobbies can accrue by capturing regulators or politicians.
Indeed, although this system is not assymetric, the political machines are also subject to the poll-makers and the media... all the while the politicians and their staffs (emplyoees, not the moses or gandalf type ) are also aware of the distorting effects of lobby groups and do indeed engage in an arbitrage of playing off one political force against another.
With regards to media. These institutions serve the critical function of informing the populace. There is way to much information to internalize so voters must rely on what is called a heuristic or a trusted source. The problem here is that voter preferences are filtered through these 3rd party institutions so voter preferences are not truly "what the people want". This is an intense contradiction of democracy bcs we cannot truly say we can extract a pure social welfare function without it being heavily influenced by elites. Yet the nature and complexity of political decision making demands these 3rd parties and elites with framing techniques to herd us like sheep. Needless to say i'm not a big fan of democratic decision making. I find it emasculating and am not suprised with putative "servants of the public" behave in contradictory ways from how we should assume they would. The primary goal of the elite eventually becomes the accumulation of political capital, and democratic mechanisms shield them and exploitative institutions from defection.
iPondR Graduate Thinker
Joined: Aug 19, 2009
Posts: 534
Location: Aussie Prawn Facility; District 10
Posted:
Thu Aug 19, 2010 9:29 am
FMJ! WTF?? how we 'descended' from the lofty heights of the Australian Sex Party and their 'Jerk Choices' campaign to all this frivolous talk of 'democracy' (actually there's a new book out about the life & death of democracy)... but OK, if you insist!
Firstly, for the benefit of D_A, here's a couple of links about Jula's Progress...
Personally, I'm smelling the rotting corpse of religion in a post-industrial, post modern, information (almost post
that
in some ways) age. There's nothing particularly deep about that opinion except perhaps to say that McLuhan was a bloody genius and we still don't fully get how mind-fucked we are by our own technological sourcerer's apprentice type situation... for hell's sake we're engaging in this global chit chat without blinking!
Anyway FMJ you're on the money for the most part but I'd like to add that the mass-media SHOULD be serving the critical function of informing the populace. That role is more explicitly enshrined and reinforced in your political structure than ours (IMO) however the pressure to conform to the 'elites' as you call them has never been greater. Would you agree however, that the proliferation of outlets via the 'web has counterbalanced this somewhat and at least in the interim?
Finally, and most paradoxically (crappy Bond films notwithstanding) the fundamentals of media proprietorship cannot be fully ignored for too long there is always a price to pay and that is the devaluation of the main asset on any media outlet's balance sheet and that is the Masthead. Murdoch would be only too aware of this, tides have and do change and you don't want to be on the wrong side of shifting demographics. Perhaps that is the final truth
'you can fool some of the people all the time and most of the people some of the time...'
Anyway's as one does nowadays on the other screen is the TED talk by Kevin Kelly called ;
Kevin Kelly sobre los próximos 5000 días de la "web" (I have the Spanish sub's turned on) and this quote is currently paused on screen;
Larry Page, Google honcho... wrote:
What we really want to do at Google is create an AI
Be afraid, be VERY afraid... [although perhaps it will all end up like in the Iain M Banks 'Culture' novels where the AI's run society BETTER than what humans can... and manipulate lifeforms and entire cultures for sport] cheerio!
_________________ I take the awe of understanding over the awe of ignorance, any day... - Douglas Adams
View next topic View previous topic
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
) are also aware of the distorting effects of lobby groups and do indeed engage in an arbitrage of playing off one political force against another.
