‘Decency’ as an extremely powerful control mechanism

The constraints of ‘decency’ and ‘respect for authority’ on display. Middle-class, white-dominated Australian culture is choking on both.

The implications of this skit are far from humorous.

The questioning of the ‘Citizen Infringement officer’ and even the over-the-shoulder instruction to him to ‘stick (the ticket) up your arse’ from those he wrote ‘fines’ for were all contained within the bounds of this ‘decency’, this ‘respect for authority’.

What Morrow was doing was not exposed and he continued doing it.

Being challenged and asked for identification and firmly questioned (i.e. not on the basis of hurt or offence) about what he was doing would have gone beyond those bounds.

Ideologies function the same way – they have inbuilt tolerances that can cater for hurt, offence, difference and questioning within the limits of ‘decency’ and ‘respect for authority’ that are carefully monitored by ideologues and updated according to requirements or developments.

What ideologues can’t tolerate is a direct, principled challenge, a push to expose those limits and to go beyond them – thereby smoking out that it is an ideology they are defending, a system of belief limited by the interests of the dominant class they serve.

There was another similar skit (I couldn’t find a copy) done at least twice by the Chaser team in which one of them, wearing the semblance of a uniform, stood at the bottom of up/down escalators and as everyone coming down got to the bottom, he told them to go back up the other one. Every person did as they were told.

All power-plays short of overt domination are made on the back of ‘decency’ and a blind submission to authority.

Question everything

red-star

Surveillance Capitalism — Desultory Heroics

By John Bucher Source: Adbusters The alarm beside your bed rings, triggered by an event in your calendar. The smart thermostat in your bedroom senses your motion and turns on the hot water, reporting your movements to a central database at the same time. News and social updates ping your phone, with your decision whether […]

via Surveillance Capitalism — Desultory Heroics

red-star

Hawke and Keating – the bosses’ men

eight-hour-banner-pioneers

Eight Hour Banner, Melbourne, 1856

Contradicting the immediate elevation to national sainthood of Bob Hawke (soon to be Australia’s Abe Lincoln?) by the capitalist media and political agents of the bourgeoisie (regarding the Labor Party, note the American spelling of ‘labour’), across the board from ‘left’ to ‘right’, following his death yesterday, the article below points to why the bourgeoisie and their lackeys thought and think so highly of both him and Keating.

***

Luke Faulkner, ‘When did unions become the bad guys?’ ABC News, updated 25.09.07

How things have changed since April 1983 when Bob Hawke’s union credentials were seen as a big plus in his quest to get into the Lodge.

Hawke’s ability to work in partnership with the union movement through the Prices and Incomes Accord was a direct result of his ACTU history.

While a drover’s dog could have won the 1983 election for the Labor Party, it is unlikely that the Accord would have been introduced, let alone remain in operation for the entire period of the Labor Government, had Hawke not had a union history.

The union movement, the Accord and the federal Labor government worked well together during the Hawke years.

The fact that the Labor Party was the political child of the union movement was not only openly confessed to, but proactively touted; especially come election time. And it worked, time and time again.

The wider Australian community which benefited from tax cuts, funding for job creation and training, extra child care places and other benefits negotiated as features of the Accord, was also happy with the role of unions.

This period of widespread union popularity and acceptance under Hawke and the Accord was not unusual but, rather, a reflection of how things had always been in Australia. Unions were an acceptable, indeed a necessary, feature of Australian working life.

So, when did unions become the bad guys? As always, there is more than one explanation.

Poisoned chalice

First there was the Accord itself.

Odd though it may seem, it could well be argued that the period in which unions had most input into the formulation of government policy was also the one which heralded their downhill slide; with one addition – Paul Keating.

Each of the ‘editions’ of the Accord (and there were eight of them) specified how, when and where pay improvements could be secured.

Pay rises were no longer won – they were awarded and any union which tried to step outside the very strict stipulations of the Accord was quickly and severely punished.

The airline pilots’ dispute in 1989 is the most obvious example of the Government response to rogue union action, though there were a number of others.

Unions became complacent. Life was easy.

The fighting spirit that had been honed over previous generations and which had resulted in great benefits being won for working people was weakened by the Accord.

With this loss of spirit came a loss of respect – from friend and foe alike.

Union members noticed the inability to strive for improvements in pay and conditions over those stipulated, and the concurrent (though possibly not related) decline in real wages over the Accord.

They blamed their full-time officials and then questioned the benefits of spending their weekly union dues when most of the same benefits negotiated under the Accord were accessible to the wider, non-union, community. The decline in union popularity started with their own members.

Keating’s EFAs

Paul Keating is another reason for the demise of union popularity. Keating wasn’t Hawke. He believed that unions inhibited organisational flexibility and productivity.

He introduced ‘Enterprise Flexibility Agreements’ (EFAs) – organisation-specific non-union collective bargaining mechanisms.

This was the first in a series of anti-union changes to the industrial legislation laws.

Between 1991-1996 he increasingly divorced himself and his government from being perceived as being political tool of the union movement. The last three editions of the Accord clearly reflect this change.

The Accord became a series of motherhood statements rather than a comprehensive policy document.

We are all aware that anti-union laws have increased over the years. What was forgotten is that Keating started it with the introduction of EFAs. …

eight-hour-day-procession

Eight hour day procession

red-star

Images

Ozzies find their meaning and worth in acting for their masters

Australia, the 51st state

Jennifer Duke, ‘Huawei executive hits out at Turnbull’ The Sydney Morning Herald 14.03.19

‘A senior Australian Huawei executive has hit back at former prime minister Malcolm Turnbull for urging the UK to ban the Chinese telecommunications equipment giant for its future mobile networks.

Last week, Mr Turnbull told prominent British MPs at a London think tank event that a recent hack of Australian political parties proved agile responses were need to counter growing cyber threats and urged them not to allow companies like Huawei to participate in building the ultra-fast 5G mobile networks.

The Australian government imposed a ban on Huawei’s involvement in 5G in August on security grounds, shortly before Mr Turnbull was replaced as prime minister by Scott Morrison.

In a lengthy response provided to this masthead before publication on the Huawei website, the telco’s director of corporate affairs, Jeremy Mitchell, under the title “Australia pays for Malcolm’s 5G muddle”, criticised the former PM for swallowing “hook, line and sinker” a “myth” there was bigger security risk in a 5G network.

The_Mongolian_octopus

The Mongolian Octopus: his grip on Australia 1886

He said the “myth was born after [Mr Turnbull’s] visit to the US in February 2018” and said Huawei knew “more about 5G networks than any agency would, or could”.

Mr Mitchell argued Huawei was willing to share information and work with governments to ensure privacy and security but”[u]nfortunately, under Mr Turnbull’s watch this didn’t happen”.

Your-king-and-country-want-you-cover-of-sheet-music

“Now that Huawei is excluded from the Australian 5G mix, telco operators will be paying around 30 per cent more for the second-best technology,” he said.

…Mr Turnbull was approached for comment.’

Australian servility 4

Ex- prime minister Julia Gillard, The Sydney Morning Herald n.d.

red-star

Images: top/second/third

8 VENEZUELA LIES THE US GOVERNMENT & MAINSTREAM MEDIA WANT YOU TO BELIEVE — Desultory Heroics

By Makia Freeman Source: Waking Times Venezuela lies abound. Both the USG (United States Government) and its lapdog MSM (Mainstream Media) have been going into overdrive, exaggerating or just plain lying about the state of affairs in Venezuela. Truth is always a casualty of war, and it’s also a casualty of pre-war, as the NWO […]

via 8 VENEZUELA LIES THE US GOVERNMENT & MAINSTREAM MEDIA WANT YOU TO BELIEVE — Desultory Heroics

red-star

Middle class Australian to bathroom mirror ‘Oh God, I’m so decent it hurts. It’s like a haemorrhoid!’

Index-of-14-OECD-nations

Kaye Fallick, ‘Fixing pension poverty is the main issue’, YourLifeChoices 22.02.19

‘First, let’s get some facts on the table.

Above is an index of 14 OECD nations with which Australia regularly compares its wealth and economic indicators. But you will rarely see this particular index, because we come last out of the top 14 OECD economies, and second last out of the full list of 35 nations. The table measures the percentage of citizens aged 66 and over who live in relative poverty, defined by an income of less that 50 per cent of the median household disposable income for that nation.

You will note the OECD average is 12.5 per cent. Older Australians living in poverty measure 25.7 per cent. This is the second worst ranking, after Korea at 45.7 per cent. Nations with similar economies to Australia – say Canada, United Kingdom or United States – measure 9 per cent, 13.8 per cent and 20.9 per cent respectively.

So, what has gone wrong?

Put in simple terms, since the early 1990s, with the introduction of compulsory superannuation, at a flat percentage, regardless of your salary, this system has worked to reward those on higher salaries. So, if you earn $40,000 in today’s dollars, your superannuation guarantee contribution (SGC) of 9.5 per cent should add $3800 per year to your retirement savings.

However, if you earn $150,000, your SGC will add $14,250 to your retirement nest egg. And because you have more discretionary income, you may take advantage of salary sacrifice or extra contributions adding further to your future retirement income.

So, what seemed like a good idea at the time has contributed to a widening gap between the retirement haves and have-nots.

This gap has widened in Australia compared with the world’s advanced economies, with the exception of Korea, we have the most older adults living in poverty – more than one quarter of our senior population. And it is no surprise that those in the ‘cash-strapped’ retirement tribe (the 15 or so per cent of Age Pension recipients who rent) are doing it toughest. They manage to ‘exist’ on the pension, but often go without essential nutrition, household heating, or much needed preventative healthcare. …’

Then there’s the on-going behaviour by middle-class Australians (of course, at arm’s length, through their representatives) towards Australia’s first people and their on-going behaviour towards refugees and asylum-seekers – the most calculating and brutal policies of any Western nation towards these people and a model for them – even Trump was impressed by them.

red-star

Source

Everyone Has Fallen for the Lies About Venezuela — Desultory Heroics

By Lee Camp Source: truthdig There are three things I know for sure in this fanciful, sometimes inglorious experience we call life: You will never have a safety pin when you need one, and you will have thousands when you don’t need one. Wild animals are breathtakingly majestic until they’re crawling up your pant leg. […]

via Everyone Has Fallen for the Lies About Venezuela — Desultory Heroics

red-star

Shame and the need to shame – a nation of little spirits

In the mid-1990s, Ansett painted a Waltzing Matilda mural on the side of one of its Boeing 737-300s

In the mid-1990s, Ansett painted a Waltzing Matilda mural on the side of one of its Boeing 737-300s

*   *   *

Email sent to Phillip Adams 02.12.04

Dear Mr. Adams,

I listened to your interview of Peter Conrad a couple of weeks ago with interest. I particularly appreciated not only his dismissal of ‘Gerald’ Henderson, but the way in which he did it, making it perfectly clear that for Conrad, Henderson’s sufficient descriptor is ‘pompous non-entity’ – and I would add, ‘in a provincial pond’. That Henderson should be given regular airings in the Herald and particularly on the ABC’s Radio National is sad evidence for the second part of my assertion.

I have also read the text of Conrad’s first three Boyer lectures. And they are, as I expected from an academic in the humanities, very frustrating. They barely move beyond a cascading display of learning, a preening of feathers, facilitated by a telling of tales, through the soft-focus of history. Charming and informative anecdotes follow upon each other. Bitterness – yes, material to work with – yes, but Conrad has so far given no indication of engaging with the depth of meaning and content that exists in the subject. His lectures sketch an interesting stream leading to our provincial pond, but the exposure and analysis of the destructiveness of the pond and how that destructiveness functions runs very weakly.

Nothing that Conrad has said so far can explain, e.g., the depth of cultural sickness in this country as displayed in that part of the closing ceremony of the 2000 Olympics when a song ‘celebrating’ the suicide by drowning of a failed petty thief, as he ran from authority, was sung by ‘candlelight’ by a packed stadium – as a hymn. Contrast this song with that of ‘John Brown’s Body’, a song of the U.S. Civil War which justifiably celebrates the courage of a man who stood against both authority and prejudice in the defence of black rights and was hung.

When one speaks of ‘Australia’ rhyming with ‘failure’ one speaks, essentially, not of what others have done to us and have told us about ourselves, but of what we have done and continue to do to ourselves and to each other. Although progress has been made and is being made, particularly as a result of immigration, Australian culture has shame and therefore the need to shame – this is where ‘tall poppy syndrome’, ‘nation of knockers’ come in – at its heart and coursing through its veins.

Our culture is built around the ‘celebration’ of (‘nobility’ in the face of) loss, failure and defeat. You are one of the very few people I have heard raise this and show interest in examples: Burke and Wills, Kelly, Breaker Morant, Dad and Dave, the heroes of Paterson and Lawson, Lasseter, Phar Lap, Les Darcy, Haines and Whitlam. Roy and HG’s savagely titled ‘The Dream’ (as Doyle said ‘If it rises above a blade of grass, cut it down.), the ABC’s Australian Story…

And in particular, Gallipoli. In 1990, when the inevitable letters from Private Jones to his mother began appearing in the papers, ex-pat Phillip Knightley argued that if we, as Australians, are going to ‘celebrate’ our involvement in the First World War (the first capitalist world war over areas of exploitation), rather than celebrating a defeat experienced on behalf of a dominant power, we should celebrate the victories of the Australian troops, e.g. on the Western Front. The ABC’s Richard Glover responded with a most bizarre article in the Sydney Morning Herald ‘Bruce Ruxton is right: we should embrace the legends of defeat’, (SMH 20.04.90 – I emailed him about this) arguing that we celebrate Gallipoli, as with our other failures, precisely because it was a defeat.

What is the sickness that runs through the above? More than that they focus on defeats and failures, it is that these are made a cause for celebration. The message in these ‘celebrations’ is the dark side of the myth of Australian egalitarianism, a myth cultivated in affluence and sunlight – the cultural imperatives ‘Thou shalt be laid back!’ and ‘Thus far and no further!’ Dream to (or worse) go beyond the cultural limits and you will be broken.

And the cultural limits are those of capital (I understand the words of Waltzing Matilda were shaped by the requirements of advertising) – you can dream, but only the small dreams of consumption – 1/4 acre block, $60,000 + p.a., 2 and 1/2 kids etc. The celebration of defeat is still not the fundamental issue, it is the celebration of a lesson. Will Conrad address this basic issue of shame as a means of class control. I doubt it increasingly as his lectures progress. He is too much the comfortable gentleman.

On the global stage we relate shame-based – both servile to a dominant power – first England, now the US (cultural imperialism only partially explains our dilemma) – and bullying in our region (Asia and the Pacific). That the ‘Deputy sheriff’ won’t sign a non-aggression pact with ASEAN is entirely consistent. What is not licked should be kicked. Our need for approval has led us into a closeness of relationship with the US as a result of which, I believe, serious consequences for this country are yet to happen.

The same need for approval (this time, awarded by ourselves) has been used by the government to cover its purpose for ‘going to the aid of’ the East Timorese – after 25 years of silence by Liberal and Labor governments and the deaths of 400,000. What else could explain such sickening, back-slapping hypocrisy, so many white, beaming faces, such an absence of geopolitical and economic analysis? The on-going corporate attempt to rape this poorest nation, even as it was declared a nation is the clearest pointer to the reality of Australia’s ‘rescue’ of East Timor.

Our self-loathing lies at the heart of the kicking Hanson got, and continues to get, even after she departed from politics. That those competing to sink the boot into Hanson the hardest were, without exception, the ‘educated’ middle-classes indicates how deeply shame and self-loathing run in our culture. Hanson was a test of how successfully we have dealt with our shame and the need to shame – and we failed that test – spectacularly. Her treatment by our ‘intelligentsia’ shows how deep and powerfully the current I write about flows. It is to her credit that Kingston showed Hanson some understanding.

That this nation has failed the test of national confidence, both internally and internationally is proven by Howard. He is in no way an aberration. He has risen from the heart of our culture and understands its meanness, shame and therefore the need to shame, intimately and instinctively. He has exploited this with absolute consistency to win four elections in a row. There could never be a clearer pointer, despite all assertions to the opposite, to how little this country has progressed in dealing with its cringe than this man and his government. Even Bush bases his meanness and aggression on his perception of the greatness of his nation, on its ‘right’ to impose itself on the world.

The greater one’s perceived capacity to achieve intellectual excellence and particularly one’s commitment to intellectual excellence, the greater the determination in our society that you should be broken, the more subtle, insidious and poisonous will be the range of devices employed against you – by family and friends. Ian Thorpe, recognising this, has assiduously (and successfully) cultivated a persona that bows to this Australian viciousness.

White, too, saw this nastiness and destructiveness – and to disguise the hurt of one who both loved and loathed what he saw and experienced, specialised in paying that nastiness back in kind. I don’t think he ever rose above that fundamental tension.

Australia will always be a servile nation until the shame – and the need to shame – that lie at its heart are named, focussed on and rooted out.

Phil Stanfield

red-star

Image

MyMaster essay cheating scandal: More than 70 university students face suspension

UnswCofaLogoUniversity_of_Sydney_new_logo_stackedsouthwales

A bad joke that can be compared to drug dealing – the little fish get caught, shamed and punished while the big fish, those in power, are honoured and protected. Their shit never stinks.

The most ruthless, treacherous, despicable cheats and thieves are those who work in academia. Why do I state this?

It is one thing for a common thief to steal – they do so without ethical pretence.

Thieves in academia, with their titles, tassled caps and glorious flowing gowns (the further up the food chain, the more impressive) lay claim to and trumpet the highest intellectual and ethical standards – standards used by the universities as primary recruitment and marketing tools.

In secular societies, the universities position themselves as the guardians of those values.

Academics regularly warn students (in class, online and in print) not to breach those standards, telling them that if they do, they will face dire consequences – then, ever on the look-out, ever scanning the flow of papers before them, these same academics wipe their boots on those standards at the first opportunity.

Such people regard exploitation as their right.

‘Guilty conscience’ in relation to their self has no meaning for them (although possibly they lecture with profundity on it). Looking you straight in the face, their lies flow with educated ease.

To lie as a justification for exploitation is their right.

In a culture dripping with shame, such people people are shameless.

You are their student, they are your master. Like the Upanishads, your place and that of the results of your intellectual efforts is at their feet – the first in awe, the second as offering.

These people are motivated, contrary to the hype and blather pumped out by the universities as they compete for funding and students every semester, not by a love for knowledge and its development and by a commitment, above all, to that most un-Australian of concepts – vision – but by the acquisition and use of knowledge in the service of their masters the bourgeoisie, by the maintenance of their position and power, and a lust for more power and kudos.

red-star

Article in The Sydney Morning Herald 21.03.15

Logos: COFA (now UNSW Art & Design)/UNSW/University of Sydney

‘A man’s gotta do what a man’s gotta do’

red-star