Can one Ethnic Studies curriculum be developed, packaged, sold, and taught everywhere? Can anyone teach Ethnic Studies? If not, what kind of training and knowledge do Ethnic Studies teachers need? Is Ethnic Studies just for social studies or is it a way of envisioning and teaching the entire curriculum? Is Ethnic Studies the same as multicultural education or something else entirely? These are the kinds of questions we address in the pages of Rethinking Ethnic Studies.
Rethinking Ethnic Studies is organized around a holistic Ethnic Studies Framework that was initially proposed by co-editor and high school Ethnic Studies teacher R. The framework connects directly with a review by co-editor Christine Sleeter on themes that run across the literature in African American, Latino, Asian American, and Native American Studies. The framework is based on four basic premises: 1. All human beings have holistic, ancestral, precolonial roots upon our planet.
For many students of color, colonization, enslavement, and forced diaspora attempted to eliminate and replace their ancestral legacies with a Eurocentric, colonial model of themselves. This Eurocentric, colonial model has been normalized for all students, translating to a superficial historical literacy and decontextualized relationship to history today and negatively impacting academic identity for students of color in particular. In order for colonized students to initiate a process of regeneration, revitalization, restoration, and decolonization, they must honestly study this historical process as an act of empowerment and social justice.
Language and Ethnic Studies We also need to address how language is used in this volume. Our language very often fails us. This book is written in English—a linguistic vestige of settler colonialism and white supremacy in the United States. Our use of English carries this legacy with it. We recognize that when we use English to communicate, we are fundamentally bound by the politics of racism, patriarchy, sexism, capitalism, and colonization buried within the English language.
Indeed, even when communicating in Spanish which three of us also do , we are also using a Eurocentric language of colonization. Because Ethnic Studies is so strongly centered on anti-racism, cultural revitalization, and decolonization, it has always and rightfully struggled with the inherent contradiction of our use of the language of the colonization: Fundamentally we are trying to use what historically has been a tool for domination as a tool for resistance and liberation. That said, Ethnic Studies is both about the critique of unequal power and the reclamation of power by marginalized and oppressed communities.
A term of oppression has been transformed into a term of potential liberation. The chapters in Rethinking Ethnic Studies embody the overall struggle between Ethnic Studies and the English language in two ways. The first has to do with terminology. The English language categories for talking about race, culture, and gender are rigid, constrictive, and built on legacies of racism, patriarchy, sexism, and white supremacy.
They are too inflexible to really describe our realities, especially if we want to name ourselves in ways that move beyond gender binaries and challenge the politics of race.
Rethinking the Challenges of Health Care: Time to Cultivate More Tri-Sector Leaders
In response to the confines of English, Ethnic Studies has pushed on the spellings and pronunciations of many commonly used racial and cultural categories and the gendered nature of the English language. This means that terms may shift from chapter to chapter. In addition to new terminology, the second way the chapters here embody the struggle between Ethnic Studies and the English language is through the use of more academic and intellectual language. Ethnic Studies rests on the foundational understanding that education has been used for colonization and white supremacy, and as part of these processes, knowledge has either been kept from communities of color or o ered up in safer, tamer forms that keep us from struggling for liberation.
Chapters describe various strategies used by teachers from elementary through high school levels to help students explore their family backgrounds, in some cases opening up space to consider painful experiences of family members, such as having fled a war, having been enslaved, or having been forced to forget their ancestral family languages and stories. Chapters illustrate tapping into ancestral knowledge students may have learned at home or community members may hold and be willing to share.
If students are to heal from the historic traumas of colonization and racism and learn to work for justice, they need to be able to understand oppressive relationships in historical terms. Chapters in this section take on issues such as genocide, segregation, institutional racism, and white supremacy, with some drawing connections to oppressive systems such as capitalism.
Chapters show multiple processes and concepts teachers have used to help students claim powerful identities of themselves as historically and culturally located people who are intellectually as well as politically capable of making a difference. Through combinations of hxstorical study, community study, role plays, and humanizing experiences in the classroom, young people learn to take on pressing issues in their own communities such as militarization of schooling and police violence.
We envision this last section as an opportunity for organizers working for Ethnic Studies to learn from counterparts who have engaged in that work themselves. We envision this last section as an extension of the fourth macroscale, Transformational Resistance, and as an opportunity for organizers working for Ethnic Studies to learn from counterparts who have engaged in that work themselves. Limitations of Rethinking Ethnic Studies We recognize that there is a tension here: Our teaching is often contradictory in that we take part in designing lessons and developing units that are linear and exist within the standardization of public schools, yet we are also interested in being creative, engaging, and responsive, if not also liberating, in our teaching.
At the time Turnbull's personal approval rating was similar to that Shorten is now experiencing. When Abbott took over, he immediately exploited Rudd's agony over climate change in a way that Turnbull could not. Suddenly, Abbott had Rudd covered. It is often said that Gillard didn't really win anyway, being forced to stitch together a fragile minority government. But Gillard, without question, would have achieved majority government had her internal opponents not leaked against her during the election campaign.
With the benefit of a majority, her fate could have been very different. It is hard to imagine a lower act in politics than to leak against your own leader in a campaign. It is one thing to leak mid-term in an effort to destabilise the leader and mount a challenge. It is another thing altogether to leak with the sole purpose of causing your own party to lose an election. Yet that's what happened in We are seeing internal opponents of Turnbull using national security and the aftermath of terrorist attacks to try to portray him as weak and indecisive.
Not as bad as , but very poor form just the same. The other recent sacking of a prime minister that allowed Rudd to return to fight the election can be spun in all directions. Gillard had fought so hard against the odds. But on the evidence she was headed for a disastrous defeat.
The most pragmatic in Labor ranks wanted to do two things: save some furniture, which they did, and put to rest any notion that had Rudd resumed the leadership he would have won the election. He got his chance, he didn't win, and he was gone for good. The leadership merry-go-round started because the process had been corrupted.
Abbott - in opposition - thrived on that. In government, he didn't measure up. The system took care of that. He writes a weekly column for The Drum. Topics: turnbull-malcolm , abbott-tony. First posted November 27, In a sporting analogy, as it's Abbotts passion, the man is demonstrating he's a very poor loser. In a team situation he is now actively working against his own side. And yet the seems some who are still assisting and encouraging him to do this. Of course for their own self interest. If "their man" ism't in power, they are powerless also. Alert moderator.
I for one support and encourage his actions, regardless of the bleating of people who don't vote Liberal. This will ensure your party will not be in government after the next election. Possibly true Tess, but is that the key issue? Mr Cassidy asks why we worry about leadership contests. Nobody seems to have clearly answered that it's a reflection of the media making political celebrities then entertaining with drama between them - rather than reporting politics as a contest of ideas.
That contest is usually more complex than average readers are willing to engage with It's fascinating to watch them play games with populism, then stand back and comment as if they are not players themselves. Barrie has not had a kind word for anyone on the non-Labor side, ever, and now he seems to have found true love and can't understand the bitterness people feel. After all, some people are capable of their own opinions without media guidance. Don't tell them, hold on, their lack of insight will mean they won't believe you anyhow.
There are a lot of commentators out there just labeling opposing article writers as Trolls, that what has become of debate from this destructive period under Abbott, even in Government he ran it like he was in opposition, he knows no other way. You voted for a Liberal government, not for Tony Abbott. That's not how the Australian parliamentary system works. You got the government and still have the government you voted for.
I do not have the government I voted for, which was right of centre, now it is left of centre, I reject their and your claim it is the same. So I will vote against them at the next election as will other who have been disenfranchised by this collection of numbats. In fact you voted for your local member, no doubt a Liberal candidate. Nowhere on your ballot did it say what leader you voted for.
Complain all you like but this is the system we have. Are they the Abbott fifth columnists, traitors to Abbott or adult enough with equal amounts of self interest and national interest to earn the money the Australian people are paying them rather than play petty power games throughout the remainder of this electoral cycle. You need to recalibrate your 'centre-meter'. You voted for a government that was far-right of centre. You now have a government that is right of centre. Mick, just curious if you are abandoning the Liberal Party, which "right of centre" party will you be voting for in the next election, what are the choices?
And do you understand how preferences work? Mick, as well as all of the above I would just like to mention that the position of Prime Minister does not even appear in our Constitution. Therefore under the Constitution as it stands we can not vote for a Prime Minister. Mick the government you voted for was on the extreme right fringes, and now it is just centre-right under Turnbull.
What I find extremely petty is that people like yourself would sabotage their own elected party and possibly cause election defeat simply because you didn't get exactly what you wanted. Barrie is exactly right Its pathetic! I don't really care whose is the leader of the Lib-Nats Coalition is. I, like so many others, simply prefer a Lib-Nats govt under anyone, any day, every day compared to another Labor-Greens govt That comment makes no sense at all.
The Libs formed government. Their members choose a leader. It's been that way since federation for us and for many earlier centuries in the UK. Where is the problem? Oh mick, give over. Every single person in Parliament is their for one reason: because their electorate voted them in. The party that commands a majority in the House of Representatives is the elected government.
The person who commands a majority of support in the party that is the elected government is the Prime Minister. Prime Minister is not determined by who had the most press conferences in a hard hat and high vis before an election. You're right about one thing, mick. This is not the Government that "we" voted for. It's not the Government anyone voted for, and that includes you.
It's an unelected Government. That Government didn't come into office - it never existed. Whether this Government has Turnbull as its leader or anyone else, unless it miraculously transforms into a Government that looks like the one Abbott promised - which ain't going to happen - no-one voted for it, you included. Abbott is now irrelevant. His actions simply reflect his inability as did Rudd to see that while he won government this was largely because of the failure of the then Government.
He did not measure up to the job of PM. Abbott may continue to shoot a few missiles but they will be ineffective. The fact is that his party has moved on. Under Turnbull it is focused on the centre. Labor is now in danger of becoming irrelevant and they will not win government in their own right should they continue on their current path. Shorten should realise he is unelectable and resign. Labor needs to break the nexus with the union movement, and develop and articulate policies that are relevant to the wide community not purely one off issues aimed in the main at inner city seats.
Elections are won or lost in the outer metropolitans seats of the large capital cities not the inner city seats which I suggest will increasingly fall to the Greens. Considering the vast majority of Mr Abbott's campaign promises were either abandoned after the election, or attempts to abandon them were made, we haven't had the government we voted for since the election. After all, as Mr Abbott himself said in "It is an absolute principle of democracy that governments should not and must not say one thing before an election and do the opposite afterwards.
Nothing could be more calculated to bring our democracy into disrepute and alienate the citizenry of Australia from their government than if governments were to establish by precedent that they could say one thing before an election and do the opposite afterwards. Mick, I am not sure what country you think we are in or what electoral system you think we vote under but we don't vote governments in. The last time I looked at our electoral system we vote for a Representative in the electorate we live in and we vote for a list of people who have put themselves up for the Senate.
We may think we vote for a particular political party or a particular government, but we don't. We may think we vote for a particular Prime Minister, but we don't. Depending on our electorate our vote may not have even went towards the election of the person who now represents our electorate, whether they are in the political party who formed government or not.
We don't elect governments or Prime Ministers! So far the Abbott side have not been as churlish as the Rudd side were. Good point Rhonda, the AFP can never say they are impartial ever again, and what they are doing now is merely desperately papering over the cracks, trying to make up for lost time.
Far, far, far too late. So do the call it the Turnbull government, did they call the last one the Abbott government? We didn't have a Rudd government or Gillard government, Howard government? It is always about who leads the government Lot's of people ay they would have voted Labor, except couldn't stand Gillard..
In practice, yes you vote for your local person, but in fact, you are enabling the leader of that party to become PM, and if you don't want that person as PM, you don't vote for the party. I'm going to go out on a limb here, but do you expect to vote for a local representative of say, Labor I'm guessing, then get all surprised when the Labor leader becomes PM? From your way of thinking, does a government operating outside of or in opposition to it's mandates make it "unelected"? So far, it looks like having Turnbull as leader has the liberal party acting more like the kind of government that people thought they were voting in at the last election.
Mate, you have a very confused understanding of how elections work in Australia. You voted for your local member, you likely didn't vote for Tony Abbott at all.
It is absolutely the government we voted for. In Australia, how they want to present themselves is their business. The government 'we' voted for and expected was quite different from what the Abbott government turned out to be. The electorate will accept some surprises but not such a lot. That is exactly what Rudd did to Gillard, both sore losers who cannot accept that the majority of their collegeues do not think they are the better leader. Gillard was treated appallingly by the media though whilst Turnbull is having a walk in the park whilst the media is handing him grapes and cheese biscuits.
I must have missed it tc When did Gillard do anything to undermine the choice made by her party? You might be able to accuse her of being one of the majority that in the end were not loyal to Rudd, but you can not accuse her of being disloyal to the party and it's direction and ideology as Abbort is being to his. I was talking about both Abbot and Ruddnot being able to accept their collegeues choice as leader and being disloyal and undermining, not Gillard.
Blzbob, I think you misread tc's post - I took it that he was referring to Rudd and Abbott, when he spoke of "sore losers". Spot on tc And might I add, Barrie Cassidy never failed to join in with the criticisms of Julia at the time, either.
He's a bit more forgiving in this article today. Robp: Poor losers are commonplace in politics and sport. It is the nature of things that people always prefer to win. The sad reality is however that for every winner there must be a loser and in this current case that loser is Tony Abbott. Doubtless he is feeling the loss of office deeply and his supporters will rally around him convinced that he was harshly treated and that he can make a comeback.
They will probably try to convince him to keep up the fight as in many cases their own futures are inextricably linked to Tony's resurgence. Hope spring eternal but in this case it is a very forlorn hope indeed. It's a Liberal conspiracy Robp. The Liberals want voters to know that the "monkey pod resistance" is ready and waiting to roll Turnbull should his polling head south. Therefore a boost in the polls for Shorten is a boost for a return to Abbott as PM as any boost for Shorten means Turnbull's polling must be heading south. It's diabolical stuff from the Libs and I fear they are on a winner with this strategy.
Not real. Last time i read the papers the planet is in chaos, WW3 is muted often and all we seem to get is this well rehearsed innovation mantra. He is ignoring our danger to make crude points with other liberals. Mick, the world is always like this. It ways was. Occasionally it's much, much worse. We need sensible people to run government not reactionary wing nuts who think shirt fronting people representing a country that really is a world power and may well be a party to WWIII you're worried about is good for domestic politics.
Australia is a very nice place to live but it doesn't even register as a small blip in world politics so there's very little we can do that anybody really cares about. The trick is to navigate dangerous waters intelligently. You need smarts for that not a 1, yard stare. Embrace the inter-web, you will become better informed. Do you really think anyone believes Turnbull is under threat? It's laughable. Indeed, because Shorten isn't the threat. Oh but what am I saying? There was a firm promise made that there will be "no sniping, no white anting, no backgrounding" against Turnbull between now and the next election Or was that not a "core promise"?
Or did that promise expire at then end of the press conference? Who knows? Turnbull can certainly laugh now, but he shouldn't laugh too hard. There is still a long way to go. Early days, trump. Early days. Remember that Rudd had the highest public approval rating in the early days of his leadership. Yet his own party took him down. Yes, Turnbull has an extremely high approval rating. But discontent lurks. Abbott and his cronies in the wings, for example. Disapproval from Murdoch that Turnbull is moderating or eliminating aspects of the Abbott platform.
Turnbull is beholden to right policies, such as the Direct Action policy which Turnbull ridiculed in the past and which is shown to be nothing but a trick of accounting. There s a danger that the bullish, militaristic attitude of the right will only inflame rather than quell IS. Loud aggressive pronouncements only promote the IS agenda. Then the Coalition has problems looming. The demise of the car and allied industries; the cost blowout in the NBN;the Ashbygate case; the increasing effects of Climate Change; the decline in the sales of coal and iron ore; failure to deal with the debt; continued carping criticism in the MSM, including the Murdoch empire; truth about the FTAs.
Remember that Turnbull has lost before and is considered by some of the Coalition and its supporters as too much to the left. This means that right wing entities such as the IPA will continue to press for a smaller government less involved in governing and a continued depletion of public services, all of which represses the weak and deprived - and promotes the idea of a trickle-down effect in the sharing of wealth. It is not clear that Turnbull will entirely agree with such an approach and he could face opposition within his own party over social policies.
Perhaps the dithering and delays over economic policy is an indication of the internal problems of the party. And what other policies of the Abbott kind will continue unabated? You do know that is the preferred PM percentage don't you. It isn't the two party preferred vote which is how we elect our MPs. Don't forget the Abbott 'landslide' was only We shall see but Labor will add to their policy platform and the result will be close enough to give a few Coalition backbenchers sleepless nights. I don't think Shorten will ever be preferred, but if it gets to the point where Turnbull hasn't been able to make changes and the public reject his new policies, along with the white anting going on we could see something like by the election.
On top of all of that, many conservatives say they wont vote for a Turnbull led LNP. Personally I think that most of these people are just blatant liars, but it could have a small impact. The perceptions of the public can change between now and the election It is just incredible that the LNP are repeating the ALP's leadership scenes from the last few years without once acknowledging the irony. I sure hope this doesn't mean we're going to see that awful monk back in power again though, not even for a few months.
Ha, ha, ha.. So, those voters were absolutely thrilled with Abbott's policies that remain substantially in place , including the Budget from Hell and the promise of an increase and expansion in the GST, but they just didn't like Abbott and they hated Rudd and Gillard even more than Abbott? Is that what everybody reads in the opinion polls? Whereas the "pundits" are seeing the next election as the demise of Tony Abbott and then Bill Shorten, the election may come down to history as the one that "killed the opinion pollsters" Clutch at that lonely straw, Alpo.
John, I'll never vote for the coalition, I have better options, the Greens latest leader Di Natali is one I like and agree with: intelligent, progressive, cares about environment etc, etc Turnbull has old Abbott's people, plus Brough and Sinodios, he agrees with Abbott's harsh asylum seeker policies, thinks that Hunt is a good Environment Minister etc, etc And Barrie of course is slyly trying to whitewash Gillard and Shorten.
Rudd was not cut down because of poor opinion polls, running a dysfunctional government or bcos he gave power to staff ahead of elected MPs Rudd was cut down bcos he refused to promote certain ex-union bosses into Ministerial roles where they could have juicy budgets to dole out to their union mates. As Greg Combet himself admitted in his biography, Rudd told him bluntly that Combet had to be de-unionised before he could become a Minister.
No doubt he said the same to Shorten who felt so entitled, as these union bosses always do, to a Minister's portfolio. Shorten and his cabal of union apparatchiks then manipulated Gillard into becoming Lady MacBeth. All Gillard had to do then was win the next election with a workable majority and then she was supposed to be looking elsewhere when Shorten and his bum mates king hit her and replaced her with Shorten as PM.
But as we all know Gillard failed at that as she failed at everything else. Ask Lindsay Tanner, a fellow Victorian, why he left the parliament at the first opportunity after Rudd was dumped. Claudius, your fantasies are just that: fantasies. Gillard will be remembered as someone far more successful and far-sighted than Abbott.
What I read is: Firstly, nothing much has changed on the conservatives side policy wise. Secondly, Turnbull is gaining the middle ground which Labor will continue to vacate while they are lead by an union muppet and pander to so called 'progressives'. Fact is; Labor is more concerned about climate change and gay marriage than they are for working Australians.
Got that right Alfie, not much has changed policy wise, because they don't have any. They are all Ministers. What does that say about Turnbull's judgement. Like the ones that Shorten just dodged? Alfie what charges did Shorten just dodge. Brough on the otherhand appears to be in serious trouble. He appears to have publically admitted to a crime. I had always assumed that gay people who wish to marry were 'working Australians' in the same way that straight people who wish to marry are. Likewise I would have thought that climate change affects both straights and gays since we are all living through one hottest year after another and sea levels continue to rise.
What a waste of resources to think about such obviously irrelevant matters. So working Australians have nobody representing them then. Climate change will affect you when you're going under water. Gay people are working people and on fact take less out of the system as most don't have children, they are voters too and expect the government to work for them also. Keep marching to your own beat mate: left, left, left, left, left. The rest of us in the real world will get on with the serious analysis of issues.
It's my experience that people support the right because they're incapable of 'serious analysis' of issues. Unlike you, many, many people are not 'rusted on'. Most people were not thrilled with Abbott, his supporters seem to forget he was never, ever popular, even when Labor were busily destroying themselves, and when he got the top gig Abbott's failings just become more prominent. He never should have been leader. Now many 'swingers' see Turnbull as a more moderate centrist, a liberal, not a conservative, someone economically conservative but socially progressive, who will try to bring the LNP back toward the centre.
Whether he can or not remains to be seen. But Labor haven't learned the lesson either, they gave Shorten the top job when he was not the most popular choice, and again it's biting them on the bum. I think Turnbull probably will win, but if he's defeated, it will be from within, Labor need to reinvent themselves, and so far seem incapable of doing so. Turnbull is a Liberal, not liberal.
He is still very conservative. Just because he is not a Tea Party ultra right member doesn't mean he still doesn't hold many of the same beliefs. When he starts bringing out some policies and budgets we will get a better idea where he lies. Malcolm would do well to follow him but then would his party let him?
Wearing horse headed blinkers and airy fairy wishful thinking may be the std Labor practice but when the ALPs own Ministry of Propaganda aka the ABC has begun to praise the Lib-Nats, Then it's time to come down to Earth and face the stark reality. Your shrill rhetoric alpo betrays even your own panic. I can sense the dismay and desperation within Labor ranks. I can smell the FEAR!!!!!
No, I haven't noticed. Please do tell me more about it I would like it to be so, but I suspect the 1. Some will, perhaps, see their error, when the first budget comes down, but I suspect Turnbull and Morrison will be clever enough to sufficiently water down some of the more poisonous elements of the last two budgets to pull a bit more "moderate" wool over their eyes. Shorten's going to have to do a lot better than he has, but even with better policies, his delivery is agonisingly woeful and inadequate to the sales job required.
Try not to overthink it Alpo. Its so very very simple. The PM is like our Dad. When we have a stable Dad we feel safe, happy and content. When Dad is unstable we feel less safe, sad and have frowns on our faces. Abbott was unstable Dad. Malcolm is new happy Dad. More people are happy because Dad says everything is going great and is going to get better. Santa might not bring us as many presents, and we cant get the new car he promised, but we can go out to tea tonight, and we can have ice cream! And for many, that's about all that matters.
A happy home and ice cream with chocolate topping. We just don't like cream junket with death cult sprinkles. Brilliant analysis!. I'm not being sarcastic. I think you've nailed it. How our whole political system works in a few paragraphs, well done. Let's put it the way it actually is shall we? Abbot proved unable to implement the economic reforms the country badly needs so he was eventually switched out for someone who perhaps can. A new leader of the same party is now popular. This shows that while Abbott's efforts were misjudged, misdirected and unpopular, the basic goal of economic reform remains quite welcome.
To the shame of your mob who once were OK at that, the Libs have the guernsey for the moment, so you are going to have to come with something better than your oooh! Let's put it another way. The day after the election was won and that seems like a decade ago now rather than just a couple of years I'm sure that most of the country, Liberal supports as well wished that there was a morning after pill for the election because everybody knew that what they had just done last night was a huge mistake. It is said of a dancing horse or piano-playing dog, that what is noteworthy is that it can do it at all, not that it can do it well.
I think that encapsulates the Abbott prime ministership. That it happened at all caused a bit of suspension of disbelief.
Andrew M. Ibrahim, MD, MSc
Eventually however these things have to be done well, by somebody. My point is not to defend Abbot although some of the anti-Abbot outrage was a faux as Donald Trump's hair , but that Abbot failing has not made Labor good, and Turnbull's numbers are as much about that as about Turnbull. We still wait for the return of those days. Thank you, Gordon. But you have only told part of the story. You have told us that the team has changed captains, but you downplay the fact that the same old, same old team remains. Remember that Turnbull has been captain before - and failed. In fact, most of the team has failed before.
Look at some of the players. Hockey, once mooted as a possible PM, has gone. Pyne: what did he achieve in education over the past 2 years and what will he achieve in industry and innovation? Dutton: failed health and now struggles with immigration. Morrison: hid behind operational secrecy in immigration and now struggles with economics.
Hunt: talks of paying emitters for promises of reduction without monitoring and backed by clever accounting. Joyce: big plans for the food basket of the north where such schemes have failed before. Do we need to go through the whole team and the reserves nodding in the background, while discontents lurk in the shadows? With so many challenges looming, it is hard to see the "team" surviving its own internal problems. Remember the :"team" which would never dump its captain mid-term? Alpo, Sadly it seems that you haven't yet grasped onto the idea that there are quite a few people out there in la la land that pick who they will vote for based on a mercurial mindset determined by things like how statesman like the leader is.
Out here in punter land we glance at the papers and note that Labor's year of ideas has come to nothing and that their performance in the parliament is becoming more pathetic with each day. Heck, they can't even get a ministerial scalp without a massive social media campaign setting things aflame. Unless Labor gets rid of Bill we will have Malcolm the God in power for many years to come. All that he needs to do is win the next election and he will make Menzies and Howard look like short term interlopers in the Priministerial office.
If he wins the next election he will be able to take the best of the Labor and Greens platform and implement it Leaving those Parties with nothing to do but dream of things that might have been. Unfortunately they thought that going easy on the Libs would keep Abbott in office and give the ALP a free ride into government. It didn't work out that well did it? You "glance at the papers" to get Labor's plan for Government? Ha, ha, ha, you are truly funny.
The ALP have already released many policies in these areas: Taxation Climate change Technology Transport Telecommunications Asylum seekers Higher education Infrastructure Sharing economy Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders if you want some of the details, just ask Alpo, I am here to serve the People If you have been asleep, don't blame Labor and please do wake up!
Look at Turnbull very carefully now Oh Alpo, you call these policies? They are nothing more than populist thought bubbles, unfunded, and a demonstration of the denialist attitude of the left and all that vote for them, which by the way is not the majority. Just ask Alpo! I think we already know the answer you'd provide. Oh dear. Do you really want the Druminatti to now regale you with the full list of the off-the-cuff, unresearched, Coalition thought bubbles from the last two years?
You know all those 'policies' that only lasted minutes in the public gaze before a host of people noticed all the holes, inconsistencies and illogic. Just for starters the 'signature', 'rolled gold' parental leave scheme. Hmm now, let's pause for a moment. Push the GST through the roof and penalise the poor. Push a huge increase on tax on cigarettes and punish the poor. Climate change? Close the mines and power stations and punish the workers. Build an NBN at a zillion dollars per kilometre. Put an extra tax on fuel. Go back to the NBN. Asylum seekers? Open borders again, as per Rudd Mk 1. Higher education?
Stifle free speech and freedom of thought by pressuring Universities to deny Bjorn Lomborg a chance to speak. Put satellite communications in the "too hard basket". Sharing economy? Put the automotive workers out of business. Aborigines and Torres Strait Islanders? Let's have another of Gillard's "captain's pick" moments. Pretty impressive list of non-achievements and non-policies.. To be as lofty as 'policies', they need pesky things like details, costings, heck, even well thought out reasoning. While I applaud the intent, I also recognise the lack of any detail as to HOW this will be achieved makes it yet another thought bubble.
No, there are few actual policies to encourage us at all. Whose side are you on Alpo? You forgot to mention that shorten has promised to find a cure for cancer, put an expedition on Mars, end world hunger and bring a just peace to the Middle-east. All the other stuff, like controlling the climate, is just part-time dilettantism. No wonder he doesn't bother to cost it or tell us how he proposes to do it. Yes Edward, it is the celebrity world we live, it seems. All rather shallow. And commentators like Barrie even ask why we have so many leadership changes!
I am not saying Turnbull in in this category but sadly the world and history have seen some of the worst leaders and most destructive leaders based on so called charismatic leaders. Of course others may call them snake oil salesmen who are selling you one big con based all on slick personality. Edward, after the last election and the success of Abbott were we supposed to have Abbott for the next decade with labor left in the wilderness. Strange that Abbott lasted all of two years if that. I hear these things stated all the time about how one leader or another is going to around for the next decade.
They said that about Howard but Howard was all set to lose to Beasley and labor until the Tampa incident when a ship arrived with all those refugees in Suddenly Howard was able to swing the election as he raised claims of we will decide who comes to our country starting all the nastiness we see on this asylum seeker issue still today. Oh and that sort of politics led to the Abbott leadership who people now claim we are better of with him gone. I have to wonder if people in this country really understand what they want that they can be swung so easily by fear and division.
As I recall it, after the election, at which Howard was turfed, the next Liberal Prime Minister wasn't even in Parliament yet. Rudd did us two favours! It really doesn't matter which party is in provided they can do the job right. Sometimes you agree with the policy, sometimes you don't but provided it's not based on some bad ideology which both parties are prone to it's all OK.
I've voted Lab ever since Malcolm The First was PM and with the single exception of when that madman Mark Lathem was leader they've been the party I prefer but that's only because overall I have more faith in where the leadership wants to take the party. I'm not that sure about Lab right now. What do they want and where do they want to go?
It was easy when abbott was PM, I didn't want to take any bus ride he was driving because I just knew he's take up over a cliff with a wild look on his face but Mal isn't ideologically driven. He's moderate. He's so sharp it's scary and he's a statesman. Am I being offered cool aide? I don't know but it's very tempting.
Where government works for the benefit of ALL, not just a few. Where we emphasise Cooperation, not just Competition. The Libs? The environment? It's only the place where entrepreneurs make their profits. Just shackles that prevent the free entrepreneurial spirit from flying high Government social services? Just a recipe to cultivate laziness in the people.
Edward, "If he wins the next election he will be able to take the best of the Labor and Greens platform and implement it leaving those Parties with nothing to do but dream of things that might have been. Olive, I think that Malcolm will more easily be able to occupy the centre than anyone else around and will be able to "sell" his bona fides. Yes, some of the nut jobs from the far right will whinge and whine but for each one that leaves more than one from the centre to centre left will come on board.
Sadly I'm of the view that it doesn't really matter who is in power because at the end of the day they all tend to be the same. The only thing I think that's important is that they are competent, and if we're lucky will try to make a few minor adjustments to things along the way. I adhere to the idea that perhaps it's better to do nothing than to do something and stuff it up. To date Malcolm seems to be brilliantly doing absolutely nothing and looking good while he's at it.
The ALP, on the other hand, look like they want to do something but aren't quite sure how they'd go about it. Your argument has some merit, Alpo. In my opinion that's largely because the Liberal policies that shape the next budget do not appear to be changing all that much from the Abbott versions. While it's all presented much more cleverly and even appealingly, the policies of the coalition have changed little in their nature. The cheap broadband version comes after some areas received the full version.
So comparisons can be made and the internet nirvana promised by fibre to the premises is not matched by fibre to the node. Despite much cleverer delivery of opinions and intentions, it appears that the coalition still want to export larger quantities of coal and have paid only lip-service to development of renewable energy systems: an industry that could replace the vanishing industries of last century. Next year's budget will speak volumes about the real Turnbull government.
At present it appears that it's not so much Turnbull's, but he's minding it for the real power-brokers in the conservative parties who still don't like all these "greenie" ideas. The swinging voters that have been wooed by the new leader think that the party will now deliver policy that is more just and fair. They will be sadly disappointed when they realise that only the leader has changed and not the motives of the party. It is more likely that Adelaide United will win this years A-League.
Hello Alpo, For someone so dismissive of opinion polls, why were you sprouting them, ad nauseam, six months ago when Labor looked to be in a much better position? It's time you gave up on "Mr. Your best chance of recovery is Labor getting whacked at the next election as the polls predict and a change of leadership enacted for the following poll - except if Labor is dumb enough to select Plibersek!! Surely you are going to bet your house on that, clete C'mon, bet your house I would gladly bet my house on it, Alpo.
But, seeing as Labor supporters have a preponderance towards blindly accepting unfunded promises, I'd like to see the colour of YOUR money first!! I wouldn't write off that number off hand. There would be a lot of Liberal voters out there who will now happily vote Lib again who may well have voted non Lib for the first time in their lives before Mal took the reins.
There are also Lab voters who quite possibly would like to see how Mal goes. He's almost a Gough figure in some ways. Mal can't walk on water but neither could Gough. He can't just drop abbott's policies no matter how bad because he would have made promises that he has to keep to get the job but if he does win the election we'll see. I think we will see because he's a shoe in and it's the election after this that people will really know what to make of him, as this article basically says.
There would be Green voters who would like to vote for him because they often don't like any of the other two so vote Green, Mal may have what it takes to attract some of them. A million may not be too many new votes to have picked up. One thing is absolutely certain, I still wake up and sigh a sigh of relief that abbott's gone and that we have the mechanism of being able to remove dud PMs.
Abbott was the dudest PM imaginable. Come here man, I have got a castle in Scotland to sell you! In any event, why being so naively convoluted? Do you want Labor-style policies? Vote for the Labor Party, man! Do you want Greens policies? Vote for the Greens! It's simple, it's not rocket science. If so, will only mean that our politics has return to more normal situation. It is rare for any party to be returned to government in the first term.
Some time you win, sometime you lose. That is life, that is politics. Here is a sentence. And a fact. Followed by some opinion. Or is that a fact? I'll change the topic in the next sentence. Consider a fact - hold it - then drop it. Back to the first topic. Is that a question? Switch topics. Meander - coffee or tea today? Is that a fact, or an opinion? You be the judge! Conclude without a point. Is Barry a Bot? Because there are thousands of bloggers out there who would kill for a weekly column on The Drum.
No Tim, Barrie is not a bot. More likely is that Barrie is a bit disconcerted that not everybody believes Turnbull is the messiah. He also seems a bit miffed that not everybody is as impressed with the new gospel as he is. Still, at their ABC messiahs come and messiahs go. It helps to have the collective memory of a goldfish. I would have expected people to be pleased that Mr Cassidy is singing the praises of a Liberal Party leader.
At the very least he has shown he's not the "Labor stooge" that people have been repeatedly accusing him of being just because prior to the leadership change he dared criticise the most useless PM since McMahon. Much of the business lobby seems to think he is the new messiah. They have been given the confidence that they will once again be able to get away with anything as they did under howard. Perhaps Barry likes to see business confident, hopeful and investing for greater returns.
Perhaps Barry owns shares, and is hoping for some short term gains. The only shares I own are in my superannuation, so I would much prefer the long term gains that would be more likely if businesses were encouraged to behave more responsibly as is the oppositions desire, for the sake of my grandchildren, rather than for the opportunity of an extravagant retirement for myself. So, to sum up - Rudd was capable but couldn't adapt to the system in place and had personality flaws, Gillard was also capable but was nobbled from within, Abbott was not capable at all and Turnbull might be capable but might also be nobbled from within.
Whilst this does show that our system can self correct it also shows that it throws up some less than perfect candidates in the first place. Turnbull was waxing all lyrical yesterday about the extraordinary people who have been members of parliament and senators - so few and so special, all the best of the best.
It became quite clear very early in the piece that Rudd was not capable of leading a parliament , he was too much of a micromanagmer who couldnt get out of the weeds , Abbott was elected because he wasnt Rudd , Rudd was elected because he wasnt Howard , Gillard actually performed pretty well given the white anting by Rudd and the constant barrage from the Murdoch press , the very same press that turned on Howard in his last term as PM , in different times she may well have gone on to win another term or two.
Abbott was pretty good as an opposition leader but three word slogans are only good in opposition they cannot become your mantra once in power. Turnbull will win the next election and to be honest I doubt that Labor will be too disappointed as they are not ready to govern yet and probably not for at least another years , lots of rebuilding to be done there. Labor only get elected when the voters feel financially safe after Liberal management. Labor make all sorts of promises when the bank balance looks better - and people are avaricious. Then Labor good up again, and The Liveraks have to straighten it out.
It's as sure as the sun comes up. Yeah, that terrible economic wastrel Paul Keating - your probably right we need to go back to a real economic manager of knowledge and repute - Howard the Treasurer for example or Costello, what did he sell the gold reserve for again? You're taking a repeated mantra "superior economic managers" - another three word slogan as truth Waterloo.
Fact is that Labor governments consistently raise our standing among OECD countries and Coalition governments consistently cause our ranking to plummet. Treating a national economy as if it were a household budget may be a good strategy for winning an election, but not for actually managing that economy. Aligned with the fact that they need growth of 3. A very fair summary of events. If Gillard had more peope like Hawke's cabinet around it would all have been very different. There are a few, but not yet enough. Hi Jonmarks. Waxing lyrical is all very well, we have yet to see anything concrete, as I am sure you agree.
You are right that Gillard was effective. Until the electorate can learn to distinguish the truth from the spin and divorce its views from personalities, we will continue to decline. Oaktree, while this country and its journalists are caught in personality politics I see little hope of an effective government that actually works for all of us, not just the few at the top. Sadly it seems in our world of celebrity, personality wins out any day over substance with good policy coming a distant last.
Add to that fear and division as the LNP have been very good at doing, than decline is a guarantee. It is like we now have Morrison promoting changes to the subsidy for superannuation, most of which goes to the top end of town, to subside tax cuts, most of which will go to the top end of town.
I don't know what happend to so called debt crises of the liberals as it seems it is no longer a crises. Any savings are to go it seems to tax cuts which we all know only favors the top end of town. Parliament is full of people who play a specialized game capably, most of whom are tokens who get a seat because the seat has to be filled, and they belong to the coalition or the ALP, the priesthoods of policy.
If we're going to exult them, we should also consider those who got caught up in travel rorting before Minchin short-cut the legal process to give them all an administrative walk. Some of those are still awarding themselves the "honourable" and some current special ones are still testing the envelope - because they're not special enough to be able to discern the "grey" from the black and white they see their ideologies in, apparently.
Gillard did a good job while handling a minority government. She would have done a great job had she had a majority. So we may next be talking about the theory that sometimes people rise in their employment higher than their abilities but in this case there are two ladders, in the case that the Opposition Party wins the election the ladder is simply moved over to the other window.
This one is interesting because if you recall Prime Mister Rudd also did something to his party's rules, but we did not hear if Leader of Opposition did anything to his party's rules. Does anyone yet know what kind of person can make it through the new rules? LR, You have a point. The Rudd rule precludes the replacement of the leader. But what are rules when something is so obvious. We have yet another personality there who will never give up.
Will the party give up, or will they let this rule destroy the party for many years to come. The illustration for Labor is the sacking of Tony. Given that the Liberal Party are operating under the old rules, it is a matter of great debate as to who is going to face the electorate at the next election I suggest to organise a national lottery on that, proceedings going to the unemployed people who will remain unemployed no matter who wins the Liberal Party race.
The leader of this particular organization needs someone who can risk giving work to others lower down the ladder, trust that they are doing a good enough job that talking for them isn't going to be detrimental, and remain in a kind of space bubble not seeing much happening not knowing much but being aware. That's kind of the job of a CEO isn't it?
Also to be void of legal responsibility but have on-hand excellent advice. Abbott was doing something that was a bit more like one of those flowcharts of teamship which generally stops somewhere about mid-way. It could be that he just got the wrong team together or was a bit before the new political practice, the one that elevates people for being sincere.
It's only a matter of months, sometimes, to be in this political theory or that one. Inside their own party. By which time you would expect them to be a bit on the nose in the electorate. It will be interesting to see if Labor can find such a candidate. There are a lot of people now mourning the demise of the Abbott Government. It is the first time I have illustrated a commonly held idea or thought. I feel that I have tapped in to Popular Sentiment.watch
Rethinking Company Loyalty - HBS Working Knowledge - Harvard Business School
Things may change now. I think its fair to say that the electorate is almost universally relieved that disaster that was the Abbott Prime Ministership is over. Turnbull is having a spectacular honeymoon period, but his he really anything more than say an Andrew Peacock of a leader all style over any substance.
Turnbull hasn't been put under any pressure yet.
- China Urban: Ethnographies of Contemporary Culture!
- Rethinking Career Development to Build Tomorrow’s Workforce.
- Time to Cultivate more Tri-Sector Leaders in Health Care?
- How Women Can Succeed by Rethinking Old Habits.
- Corporate Integrity: Rethinking Organizational Ethics and Leadership!
- Browse by Subject.
Hasn't had to do anything, well except getting rid of knighthoods. Really he hasn't presented any policy, just a lot of announcements. Labor on the other hand has presented policy.
Related Leadersh*t: Rethinking the True Path to Great Leading
Copyright 2019 - All Right Reserved