Suburban Eastern Australia.
Speaker:An environment that has over time evolved some extraordinarily
Speaker:unique groups of homo sapiens.
Speaker:But today we observe a small tribe akin to a group of meka that gather together
Speaker:atop a small mound to watch question and discuss the current events of their city,
Speaker:their country, and their world at large.
Speaker:Let's listen keenly and observe this group fondly known as the
Speaker:Iron Fist and the Velvet Glove.
Speaker:Yes.
Speaker:And this particular group of Mekas requires a solid internet connection.
Speaker:Which unfortunately Scott, the Velvet Glove does not have tonight.
Speaker:Something's happened to his, internet, the nbn.
Speaker:So he's out of action.
Speaker:It's just Joe and I.
Speaker:So there we go.
Speaker:for episode 391 of this podcast, which is the Iron, Fist and the
Speaker:tech guy, Joe, how are you, Joe?
Speaker:I'm good.
Speaker:That's good.
Speaker:So yeah, 391.
Speaker:If you're in the chat room, say hello and already Whatley is in there.
Speaker:wondering, cause we are two minutes late probably coming on and Whatley was mm-hmm.
Speaker:Waiting.
Speaker:Good on you, Whatley.
Speaker:So, right tonight we're gonna talk about news and politics and sex and religion.
Speaker:What are we gonna talk about?
Speaker:a little bit of homework on cluster bombs briefly mentioned.
Speaker:Commonwealth Games, sex education, you've all wanted to know about the
Speaker:tort of malfeasance in public office.
Speaker:school funding Scripture Union.
Speaker:Our friend Alison had a, was heavily involved in a bit of a
Speaker:disaster for Scripture Union.
Speaker:So full marks to Alison, we'll tell that story.
Speaker:More polls.
Speaker:There's always polls about something more, polls about the voice and other stuff.
Speaker:a story about instant pot look, can't get by without talking about class.
Speaker:It's an important concept.
Speaker:So if we're gonna be talking about an article that talks about class,
Speaker:two articles, we'll get to those.
Speaker:So looking at the bad white working class and how racist or not they
Speaker:were for this particular family.
Speaker:So yeah, that's where we're heading on this particular one.
Speaker:And, and yes, Ross is in the chat room as well.
Speaker:Good on you, Ross.
Speaker:So Joe, just before we started, you mentioned you've been watching.
Speaker:In your spare time, YouTube videos about cluster bombs?
Speaker:Yeah.
Speaker:It was a discussion from an Australian analyst called Perran, or Pune, P e
Speaker:r u N, who was saying, you know, why would you want to use cluster munitions?
Speaker:and what's the big deal anyway?
Speaker:And was saying basically, so they're talking about artillery shells.
Speaker:And an artillery shell has as an example, a radius of around a hundred meters.
Speaker:But you get a very big explosion in the middle, and the effects as you get
Speaker:further and further out are less and less.
Speaker:Mm-hmm.
Speaker:And the idea with a cluster munition is rather than one big explosion in
Speaker:the middle, you split it out into 20 or 50 smaller explosions that
Speaker:are spread across that same space.
Speaker:Mm-hmm.
Speaker:and they're saying that figures that have come from both use on artillery ranges,
Speaker:but also during the Vietnam War, is that effectively it's a 10 to one usefulness.
Speaker:So for every one round of, cluster munition new fire, you'd need to
Speaker:use 10 normal artillery rounds to get the same effect in terms
Speaker:of enemies, vehicles destroyed or enemies killed, soldiers killed.
Speaker:Mm-hmm.
Speaker:the downside is obviously that some of the munitions don't explode, and it's the
Speaker:same with artillery rounds, but obviously you're putting more into the same area.
Speaker:Mm-hmm.
Speaker:and that civilians later on are gonna wander around and rather than one
Speaker:big bomb that you are gonna see and not trip over, yes, there are lots of
Speaker:smaller bombs, which you could quite easily trip over and set off, and said
Speaker:effectively it's the same as landmines.
Speaker:they're, the anti-personnel mines are a similar size explosive.
Speaker:They're similarly hidden, and posed.
Speaker:More or less the same danger to civilians.
Speaker:Mm-hmm.
Speaker:So his point is that a cluster munitions have already been
Speaker:used by both sides in this war.
Speaker:they already had stockpiles, neither side are, signatories to the treaties, banning
Speaker:them and saying that the countries who have signed up are the ones who don't
Speaker:rely on artillery, because effectively it's a very useful artillery round.
Speaker:Right.
Speaker:Okay.
Speaker:So, so for a, for an army that has a superior air force and doesn't
Speaker:expect to rely on artillery, they're quite happy to sign up on it.
Speaker:They're saying, Hey, oh, you are the guys.
Speaker:You shouldn't have these cluster bombs.
Speaker:Let's all agree, no cluster bombs.
Speaker:Whereas those people who rely heavily on artillery and
Speaker:Russia was one of the biggest.
Speaker:Right.
Speaker:Are going fuck off.
Speaker:No, they're a really useful round.
Speaker:Right.
Speaker:We're not gonna sign up to this agreement.
Speaker:Okay.
Speaker:And the Ukrainians, were saying we've gotta clean up the landmines
Speaker:anyway, so will clean up custom bombs.
Speaker:So effectively the current front is World War I trench warfare.
Speaker:The Russians have laid huge minefields.
Speaker:There's probably not gonna be good records to clean up after the war, so they're
Speaker:gonna have to demine the whole area.
Speaker:So whether they're cleaning up Russian mines or whether they're
Speaker:cleaning up Ukrainian submunitions doesn't make much of a difference.
Speaker:There you go.
Speaker:So as long as the utilization is kept to those areas and not used
Speaker:to bombard civilian areas mm-hmm.
Speaker:then realistically there's not much of an impact.
Speaker:And that's why it's not the big, bad monster that it's been made out to be.
Speaker:Who would've thought that we could simply say cluster bomb bombs?
Speaker:Not so bad after all.
Speaker:Oh, it's not a laughing matter, but that's the state of the world we're at.
Speaker:Mm-hmm.
Speaker:Good Lord.
Speaker:Yeah.
Speaker:And Joe, this one you're telling me as well, I hadn't come across a sex education
Speaker:book in Woolworths Big W, but Yes.
Speaker:Oh, big W, right.
Speaker:Okay.
Speaker:Yeah.
Speaker:so, a book aimed at 10 to 16 year olds, introducing with diagrams
Speaker:and text, various in, things that kids are looking up anyway.
Speaker:Sex education stuff, sex education stuff, however it covers, you know, how to
Speaker:have safe oral sex and how to have safe anal sex, and discussions about consent.
Speaker:And strangely enough, the religious right have got wind of this and are absolutely
Speaker:disgusted that this is being settled, aimed at young children, grooming them.
Speaker:because, you know, we, we can hide our heads in the sand and pretend that kids
Speaker:aren't looking this up on, the internet anyway, with their unrestricted access.
Speaker:And even if you stop your kid have ac access to a mobile phone, other kids
Speaker:in the playground have mobile phones, they are all looking it up in the
Speaker:playground and showing it to around.
Speaker:Mm-hmm.
Speaker:And this, yeah, this is what my daughter has told me was
Speaker:going on in her school, so, yep.
Speaker:It doesn't matter the school.
Speaker:and there's very good evidence that kids who are given the words and told that they
Speaker:have the right to say no, are less likely to accept grooming and abuse from adults.
Speaker:Yes.
Speaker:I hadn't heard that statistic.
Speaker:So that said, less likely to be subject to sexual abuse.
Speaker:Yeah.
Speaker:Basically the, the more you pretend that it's dirty and disgusting and
Speaker:we can't possibly talk about it, The less likely it is for a kid to
Speaker:speak up about it and feel that they can safely discuss it with an adult.
Speaker:Mm-hmm.
Speaker:Yeah.
Speaker:So by giving them the words, giving them the tools and saying, this is
Speaker:what is right and what's wrong, not on a moralistic in terms of sex, but
Speaker:you know that you have the right to say no, and that, you know, having
Speaker:unprotected sex is dangerous and all, all those sort of things, you generally
Speaker:lead to better outcomes for the kids.
Speaker:Mm-hmm.
Speaker:And therefore, the question is for these people who are getting up in
Speaker:arms about it, what's their agenda?
Speaker:Why do they want the kids to not have the ability to say no?
Speaker:Mm, yes.
Speaker:So that's a good counter argument.
Speaker:And, so far, big W has said to the book, banners get stuffed.
Speaker:Basically Big W have said, down, effectively it's down to the parents.
Speaker:They sell all sorts of stuff.
Speaker:I, I think the best that the nut jobs are going to get is possibly, it in
Speaker:a sealed wrapper or it put in a place that is harder for kids to reach.
Speaker:Mm.
Speaker:Yep.
Speaker:Yep.
Speaker:Hey, the problem with the chats come up again.
Speaker:So do you listen?
Speaker:well those who are on the, watching the live stream, for some reason the
Speaker:chat's disappearing from the, screen.
Speaker:So we'll try and get it up so that your chats appear on the screen cuz that's fun.
Speaker:But, yeah, dunno what's going on there Joe.
Speaker:We'll have to investigate with Restream later, so we'll try and
Speaker:stop and start the chat overlay and see if it comes up at some stage.
Speaker:It's coming out for me.
Speaker:Is it?
Speaker:Yeah.
Speaker:Is it showing on the screen?
Speaker:Yep.
Speaker:Ah, okay.
Speaker:Alright, let me just bounce it from my end and see if it, yeah.
Speaker:Did that refresh for you?
Speaker:No, but if it's coming up on the screen for other people, that will do so.
Speaker:If it's there, good.
Speaker:Okay.
Speaker:Right.
Speaker:what else we gotta talk about?
Speaker:So that was, a little bit of, homework and other stuff.
Speaker:And Joe, it seems to change when I change the window.
Speaker:When I minimize the window so I can bring my word document up, but,
Speaker:anyway, maybe it's just all at my end.
Speaker:So, that's what she said.
Speaker:Yeah.
Speaker:Right.
Speaker:just briefly, Commonwealth Games in Melbourne, well in Victoria, regional
Speaker:Victoria, dictated, Dan announced not gonna have 'em decide to cancel everyone's
Speaker:up in arms about, well, I think the general sentiment will probably be
Speaker:really who needs the commonwealth gains?
Speaker:Is it worth it?
Speaker:It's such a second rate event, and if it's gonna cost money, is it really
Speaker:gonna generate enough benefit to justify.
Speaker:Expense in these tough times, I think people will probably
Speaker:be on board with that decision.
Speaker:So anyway, dictator Dan doing what he thinks and actually, I was gonna say
Speaker:doing something, but he's actually not doing something, but he is making a
Speaker:decision, at least I I, I thought it was an excuse to fund sporting infrastructure.
Speaker:Yeah.
Speaker:So I think he's decided to still fund some sporting infrastructure
Speaker:and that would just be cheaper than running a Commonwealth Games.
Speaker:Yeah.
Speaker:That seems to be the line he's running.
Speaker:So we've spoken in the last few weeks about, yeah, Bronwyn agrees.
Speaker:most people don't care.
Speaker:So the Mass ma, the mainstream media will make a lot of press about it, but,
Speaker:yeah, $7 billion is a lot and I think people will probably agree with you.
Speaker:You mean the Murdoch press won't agree with something that dictated and does?
Speaker:Yes.
Speaker:Shocking.
Speaker:Yeah.
Speaker:It's almost like if, if the Murdoch press agrees with you on something mm-hmm.
Speaker:You really have to double check it's, it's a bad idea.
Speaker:Almost.
Speaker:Certainly.
Speaker:That's why I'm, that's why I'm so reticent on this whole voice
Speaker:thing to get my argument up there.
Speaker:Cause I think this guy actually agree, but my reasons are different.
Speaker:My reasons are completely different.
Speaker:Get to the same result.
Speaker:But yeah, I'm fully aware of that, dear listener.
Speaker:Yes, I am on the side of some same side of some crazy, crazy people.
Speaker:And it does, is, it is disconcerting.
Speaker:So anyway.
Speaker:Alright.
Speaker:bill Shorten was talking about, he's quoted here from Bill Shorten,
Speaker:but I talking about, robo debt.
Speaker:What, what's his background?
Speaker:Bill?
Speaker:Shorten?
Speaker:Yeah.
Speaker:What do you mean?
Speaker:Bill Shorten is, is he a lawyer?
Speaker:could be.
Speaker:it's probably been so long in the union movement.
Speaker:He probably did law degree and went, worked in a union and I I, I'm just
Speaker:curious that he knows about this.
Speaker:That's, yeah.
Speaker:Well, all of the listeners to this podcast will know about it shortly,
Speaker:Joe, so it'll mean common knowledge.
Speaker:But, he says, I don't know why coalition ministers with that sort of very, very
Speaker:damning analysis by the Royal Commission, why they think when the commissioner
Speaker:says there's the tort of malfeasance in public office, why they think that people,
Speaker:victims won't sue them individually.
Speaker:So she must have mentioned it in her report actually.
Speaker:Yeah.
Speaker:Yeah.
Speaker:So I wasn't aware of the tort of malfeasance or misfeasance
Speaker:in public office, but generally speaking, it's damages for loss
Speaker:inflicted by public officials guilty of conscious maladministration.
Speaker:So abuse of power by public officers who either knew they were breaking the
Speaker:law or recklessly decided not to care that this might be so, and that would
Speaker:seem to cover some of the players Yeah.
Speaker:In the robo debt scenario.
Speaker:And, you know, I keep thinking about what is gonna make
Speaker:people accountable in future.
Speaker:And I was thinking, well, public servants will look and they'll,
Speaker:they'll see what's happened to this Catherine Campbell woman and say, okay,
Speaker:I don't wanna be in that position.
Speaker:I've gotta write the email that says we can't do this.
Speaker:Oh, cover your ass.
Speaker:Yeah.
Speaker:Yes.
Speaker:I have to write the cover your ass email.
Speaker:Even though I've been instructed not to write, cover your ass emails.
Speaker:There might well be a Royal Commission in three years time and I need that email.
Speaker:So that's one thing.
Speaker:But, yeah, the, the tot of malfeasance in public office, if you, Doing something
Speaker:purportedly in discharge of your public duty, you cause loss to people, you're
Speaker:doing it maliciously, or, with disregard to the legality, recklessly then Yeah.
Speaker:Can be sued.
Speaker:So Morrison, apparently he's been approved for legal aid for ongoing.
Speaker:Yeah.
Speaker:Cuz he hasn't gotten any money of his own.
Speaker:Yeah.
Speaker:And I guess they want to give him a fair chance of defending himself if
Speaker:somebody brings a tort of misfeasance or malfeasance against him.
Speaker:But, well, I think everyone has the right to legal defense that used to
Speaker:piss me off about Cardinal Paolo going, how dare these lawyers represent him?
Speaker:And it's like, no, no, no.
Speaker:It's give him the best defense he can have.
Speaker:And then when he's found guilty, we can say he had the best defense possible.
Speaker:I think that might be, there's no excuses.
Speaker:Mm-hmm.
Speaker:I think that might be the theory here with the different players Right.
Speaker:Is give 'em a good legal defense.
Speaker:But that will be fascinating, Joe.
Speaker:If there's a, I mean, there'd be a bunch of sort of ambulance
Speaker:chasing lawyers out there.
Speaker:look, I'm surprised that who, who are the usual group of, the class actions.
Speaker:Yeah.
Speaker:I don't wanna name 'em, but they're out there.
Speaker:Yeah, exactly.
Speaker:So you would think that they would be approaching these people and
Speaker:saying, Hey, let's give this a crack.
Speaker:But especially those that have lost relatives.
Speaker:Yes.
Speaker:So that would be really interesting if, we start seeing that.
Speaker:yeah.
Speaker:I don't know whether you could get manslaughter out of that.
Speaker:No, I don't think you could.
Speaker:But seems a good chance of the tour of Ms.
Speaker:Fe.
Speaker:Oh, absolutely.
Speaker:So, yeah.
Speaker:I.
Speaker:Broman says in the chat room, as a junior public servant many years back,
Speaker:I was always told to ensure that there was a cover your ass memo on the file.
Speaker:No public servant should carry risk for ministers.
Speaker:I think that Broman as part of that Royal Commission, I think there was talk about
Speaker:people being pressured not to send or, or do those sorts of things, but yeah,
Speaker:anyway, that's what you need to do.
Speaker:so, Ross says, I saw rumors in the media that Morrison was intending
Speaker:to address Parliament about it soon.
Speaker:No way would he address Parliament in a meaningful way.
Speaker:can you see him apologizing for it?
Speaker:He would just deny blatantly that he'd done anything wrong and or pass the buck.
Speaker:Yeah.
Speaker:Yeah.
Speaker:Morrison has never addressed anything in his life.
Speaker:He's always scooted around it.
Speaker:He might talk in Parliament and scoot around the topic and.
Speaker:And beef up his own position somehow, but he'd listen to him anyway.
Speaker:noisy.
Speaker:Andrew says, A young friend of mine had firsthand experience of robo debt.
Speaker:She'd got her health self handy job by then, so just paid up.
Speaker:Yeah.
Speaker:Yeah.
Speaker:Well, I, I wonder whether, you can sue for getting your money back.
Speaker:I'm sure they could.
Speaker:Absolutely.
Speaker:yeah, so, yeah, I find it weird.
Speaker:my brother's ex-girlfriend was Catherine Campbell, so every time I
Speaker:see that name pop up, there you go.
Speaker:Yeah.
Speaker:Ross says, of course, he'll drop Catherine Campbell in it for sure.
Speaker:That's what he'll do in his speech is he'll drop her in it and
Speaker:Bronwyn says, yes, that's right.
Speaker:Trevor.
Speaker:The public service is a lot more politicized these days, and people
Speaker:appease ministers because they are rightly worried about their job security.
Speaker:Ah, that's the world we are in.
Speaker:So anyway, if something's gonna change behavior, I reckon this taught of
Speaker:malfeasance or misfeasance in public office could be one that could do it.
Speaker:Of course, these players would all expect the government to cover them
Speaker:if there is a finding against them.
Speaker:Why?
Speaker:But governments don't have to.
Speaker:No.
Speaker:So wouldn't that be great to see an award against some of these characters
Speaker:and have to pay for it personally?
Speaker:Yeah.
Speaker:There was a by-election, although having said that, mm-hmm.
Speaker:Yeah.
Speaker:the civil service is paralyzed by indecision as it is.
Speaker:Mm-hmm.
Speaker:Can you, can you imagine the indecision if they had financial liability
Speaker:for every decision they make?
Speaker:Well, maybe you just take care to do it legally, maybe, and get advice
Speaker:and then not shove that advice.
Speaker:A away in a basket somewhere that nobody can seize it like money.
Speaker:I suppose it's not that hard to actually conduct yourself properly
Speaker:and not be sued in that situation.
Speaker:If you just, you mean like conduct yourself education when they were
Speaker:told that discriminating against the satanists would be, well,
Speaker:that's a different kettle of fish.
Speaker:Yes.
Speaker:But if you're acting in good faith and without knowledge of the invalidity
Speaker:of the act, then it's unlikely that it would constitute misfeasance.
Speaker:The whole point is these people were not acting in good faith.
Speaker:Yeah.
Speaker:So it's a pretty high bar.
Speaker:It's gross negligence or it's Yes.
Speaker:Deliberate malpractice.
Speaker:Yes.
Speaker:Yeah.
Speaker:So I don't think your average public servant could say,
Speaker:oh, it's a very risky career.
Speaker:I've chosen, just do the right thing.
Speaker:That's obvious.
Speaker:You will be fine.
Speaker:I would've thought so.
Speaker:Mm.
Speaker:Anyway.
Speaker:That will be interesting to see how that develops over the next few years.
Speaker:Love to see that happening.
Speaker:what else have we got?
Speaker:Joe?
Speaker:You can still see the chat?
Speaker:In the chat?
Speaker:I can, yeah.
Speaker:Yeah.
Speaker:All right.
Speaker:Okay.
Speaker:I can see it on our little side screen, but I don't see it in the main screen.
Speaker:No, no, I see it on the stream window.
Speaker:Excellent.
Speaker:Okay.
Speaker:and Broman says, I think it's just about having processes in place to ensure
Speaker:that decision making is evidence-based and has a robust basis overall.
Speaker:That includes getting reliable advice as to legality.
Speaker:There you go.
Speaker:I think I've told this story before, but a mate of mine was an accountant
Speaker:fully qualified working in one of what was then the big four firms.
Speaker:And he wasn't at partner level, but he was like an associate.
Speaker:And then he decided to become a lawyer and he did the bar exams and then
Speaker:worked as an article Clark in, law office, and of course ended up in
Speaker:the tax section of some law office.
Speaker:And ended up, they were writing some advice and the partner in
Speaker:charge was saying one thing.
Speaker:And my friend Philip was saying, I disagree.
Speaker:I don't think that's right.
Speaker:And the partner said, well, you know, I know what I'm doing here.
Speaker:I'm, this is what I'm saying the advice is.
Speaker:And Phillip said, okay, but I'm just gonna write a memo in the file
Speaker:that said my opinion was this, and I told you this was my opinion.
Speaker:And apparently that was enough that this partner then reconsidered and
Speaker:the advice was changed saying, right.
Speaker:That's the sort of thing that can go on if the system's working correctly.
Speaker:Yeah.
Speaker:Yeah.
Speaker:Pretty ballsy move.
Speaker:Like most article Clarks wouldn't have been ballsy enough, but
Speaker:he had enough experience.
Speaker:Yeah.
Speaker:That he would do that.
Speaker:I, I, I've told colleagues in the past that.
Speaker:A verbal agreement is worth the paper it's written on, and that if you get
Speaker:a verbal agreement, you send an email afterwards saying, just confirming
Speaker:in our discussion that you said this.
Speaker:Exactly.
Speaker:Yeah, exactly.
Speaker:There you go.
Speaker:young people out there cover your ass.
Speaker:I cover your ass MIMO email.
Speaker:That's what you need.
Speaker:Right?
Speaker:there was a by-election on the Gold Coast because, Stuart Robert
Speaker:resigned and, so the seat of Fadden and returned an LMP candidate who
Speaker:received a positive swing of 4.3%.
Speaker:So you would think, Joe, after all of the robo debt publicity,
Speaker:what's going on that an electorate.
Speaker:Will provide a swing in favor of the LMP 4.3%.
Speaker:It's it's people who want to punish poor people.
Speaker:Yes.
Speaker:Because they're doing nicely.
Speaker:Thank you very much.
Speaker:Yeah.
Speaker:Yeah.
Speaker:You have to look at the demographics.
Speaker:This is LMP Heartland on the Gold Coast here.
Speaker:So, so yeah, positive swing, they retained it.
Speaker:The other part of this was that there was no Clive Palmer candidate who
Speaker:had previously had 6% of the vote.
Speaker:So there was 6% of the previous vote that had to go somewhere.
Speaker:And guess what?
Speaker:4.3% went to, the LMP guy.
Speaker:So is this federal or?
Speaker:Yeah, this is, yeah, this is the Stuart Roberts eye election because Mr.
Speaker:Potato had tried to stand for one of the Gold Coast safe seats.
Speaker:He did.
Speaker:And they didn't have him.
Speaker:Yes.
Speaker:And he came, he, he s slunk back to here and they reelected him.
Speaker:That's right.
Speaker:Christ knows why.
Speaker:Yeah.
Speaker:Yeah.
Speaker:so I think that explains the swing is just that there, well there wasn't a,
Speaker:a Clive Palmer candidate and that 6%, well they, for Clive Palmer weren't
Speaker:gonna vote labor or greens, were they?
Speaker:So, so labor really had a minor swing against them.
Speaker:oh, let me just see.
Speaker:I can't see it.
Speaker:My, oh, just the labor vote fell by 0.25 of a percent.
Speaker:The one that really fell was the greens.
Speaker:So they fell from 11% to just over 6%.
Speaker:but according to this article, for right wing retiree heartland, which
Speaker:is what this seed was, that's not going to worry the greens too much.
Speaker:I think they would take that as a badge of honor.
Speaker:Actually, if they were the greens, they would go.
Speaker:Okay.
Speaker:In this particular electorate, if we get a swing against us like that, that's
Speaker:probably a good sign based on, well, Ross, Ross is saying it went to the hemp party.
Speaker:Ah, okay.
Speaker:did he swing against greens and went to hemp party?
Speaker:Okay.
Speaker:Hmm.
Speaker:Okay.
Speaker:There we go.
Speaker:he also says, dodgy people rely on bullying good people into not speaking up.
Speaker:It happens everywhere.
Speaker:Who, who?
Speaker:Who'd have thought that the geriatrics were potheads?
Speaker:Yes.
Speaker:Yes.
Speaker:They would've thought so.
Speaker:Anyway, gold Coast is a strange place, dear listener.
Speaker:It is strange.
Speaker:I love cooling gata where we are.
Speaker:I don't consider some of Mexicans.
Speaker:I don't consider cooling gata the Gold Coast.
Speaker:It's more, it's a Northern New South Wales.
Speaker:It's more of a village.
Speaker:Yes, exactly.
Speaker:The rest of the Gold Coast is weird.
Speaker:I've told this story before, but I'll tell it again.
Speaker:In that, again, when I was in Article Clark, you would, as a lawyer, you would
Speaker:have undertakings with other lawyers where you would say by letter, if you
Speaker:send me this bank check for this amount, I undertake that I will send you this
Speaker:title deed for this property, for example.
Speaker:And a solicitor's undertaking is considered a very serious promise.
Speaker:Mm-hmm.
Speaker:And if you don't comply with it, you can take 'em to the law society and
Speaker:have all sorts of CREs against somebody.
Speaker:So a sort of a promise, a solicitor's undertaking using the word undertaking
Speaker:was considered very serious.
Speaker:And where does their bond?
Speaker:Yes.
Speaker:And I remember my boss at the time who was right, winging Tony, I had some
Speaker:deal, some things, some transaction, and I said, we're gonna be doing an
Speaker:un mutual undertaking, blah, blah.
Speaker:He said, that's fine.
Speaker:I hang on a minute.
Speaker:It's not with a Gold Coast law firm, is it?
Speaker:And I said, no, no, it's not.
Speaker:He said, that's okay.
Speaker:Just never accept an undertaking from a Gold Coast law firm because
Speaker:they're cowboys down there.
Speaker:Like, it's just a strange place in that regard.
Speaker:Mm.
Speaker:Well, I, the Queensland police chief who was found guilty,
Speaker:ended up down there, didn't he?
Speaker:Terry Lewis.
Speaker:Yeah.
Speaker:Right.
Speaker:Yeah.
Speaker:Probably.
Speaker:Yeah.
Speaker:The bag man.
Speaker:Mm.
Speaker:All that.
Speaker:Yeah.
Speaker:Probably.
Speaker:Was he the bag man?
Speaker:No, he was just the bag collector.
Speaker:There was another guy who's the bag man, I can't remember.
Speaker:Hmm.
Speaker:For my time.
Speaker:Yeah.
Speaker:actually it was a good, good podcast with, Chris Masters, who was the
Speaker:investigative journalist behind the Four Corners Report, the Moonlight State,
Speaker:and he was behind a number of different, Inquiries that led to Royal Commissions.
Speaker:And he was also the guy behind the one with this, SAS soldier.
Speaker:What's his name?
Speaker:He's just been found.
Speaker:Oh yeah, yeah, yeah.
Speaker:And he's lost the defamation trial and he's appealing.
Speaker:Okay.
Speaker:yeah, so he involved in a number of big cases, really good journalist.
Speaker:Anyway, late night live interview with Chris Masters, old school journalist.
Speaker:Sadly, not many like him left.
Speaker:You know that the Moonlight State is still up on the ABC website.
Speaker:Not surprised.
Speaker:Should be, yeah.
Speaker:Should be, should be required watching in, schools.
Speaker:Yes.
Speaker:Certainly up here.
Speaker:Mm yep.
Speaker:Yep.
Speaker:school funding.
Speaker:There was an article in The Guardian, because they had
Speaker:done some right to information requests about school funding and.
Speaker:It turns out your listener, it's not good for our state school system.
Speaker:So compared to private schools, funding to private schools has increased almost
Speaker:twice as much as funding to public schools in the decade since the Gonski review.
Speaker:So Gonski did a review and said we should really come up with a figure that it costs
Speaker:to educate per student, and we should take into account factors that make it
Speaker:more expensive to educate certain kids.
Speaker:And so kids from difficult, low socioeconomic backgrounds are
Speaker:statistically more expensive to educate for a variety of reasons
Speaker:than kids from upper middle class.
Speaker:And so the government should be paying more to schools that
Speaker:educate those sorts of kids.
Speaker:Than they do to schools that educate, the others.
Speaker:So, if you can imagine, dear listener, of course, in a public, in a private
Speaker:school where it's very easy to expel kids and you generally have well behaved
Speaker:students with parental involvement anyway.
Speaker:Correct.
Speaker:because people are figuring if your kid's a real rat bag, I'm not
Speaker:spending 30 grand to send 'em to this expensive school in the first place.
Speaker:Yep.
Speaker:So there's a filtering aspect that takes place.
Speaker:And then even if they've got the money and put 'em in there and the school
Speaker:says, this kid's just too hard, you can just take 'em to the local state school.
Speaker:So the state schools invariably end up with a higher proportion of
Speaker:kids who are difficult to educate, so they should get more money.
Speaker:Mm-hmm.
Speaker:Or doing that.
Speaker:And Gonski was about, you know, what's it cost to educate a kid?
Speaker:Let's make sure every school gets frightening depending
Speaker:on the caliber of kid.
Speaker:Gonski was not a vote winner because, you know, I, I've paid my taxes.
Speaker:I should get funding for my kid in, in private school.
Speaker:Yes.
Speaker:That is an Australian thing that Yeah.
Speaker:Did.
Speaker:Right?
Speaker:Just like I don't get public transport.
Speaker:I should get money to spend on my car every year that would otherwise
Speaker:go into public chat support.
Speaker:It is the same argument, isn't it?
Speaker:It is.
Speaker:The government is subsidizing the, the bus commuter by mm-hmm.
Speaker:$300 a year or whatever it is.
Speaker:I should get that $300 that I could spend on my car.
Speaker:Yep.
Speaker:It's the same thing anyway.
Speaker:in this article from The Guardian, they're really looking at the period
Speaker:from 2012 to 2021 and funding for independent and Catholic schools
Speaker:rose by 34% and 31% while funding for public schools increased by just 17%.
Speaker:So not only were we starting off at an unequal position, but
Speaker:it's just been getting worse.
Speaker:And,
Speaker:but who made the promise that the private schools would be
Speaker:no worse off under Gonski?
Speaker:Gillard made a promise to pacify them and did that.
Speaker:And yeah, there's just been a reluctance to lose votes to the
Speaker:private school, because, because it's 40% of the population.
Speaker:Yes.
Speaker:Yeah.
Speaker:So, look, increasingly though, particularly in this current environment,
Speaker:must be a lot of people who are second guessing, sending their kids to a private
Speaker:school, surely, and when things are tough.
Speaker:So you're probably, your heads out I would think.
Speaker:The future for private schools is gonna be Bleecker and Bleecker
Speaker:cuz people just cannot afford it.
Speaker:I wouldn't have thought.
Speaker:And culturally why you would send your kid to a private single sex school,
Speaker:particularly boys and have them mixing with a bunch of upper class twits.
Speaker:I just, do you really want your boys inculcated in that culture?
Speaker:Really?
Speaker:Goodness sake.
Speaker:Oh yes.
Speaker:Cuz you know the old boys network.
Speaker:Yeah.
Speaker:Total rubbish.
Speaker:Complete rubbish fury.
Speaker:I dunno.
Speaker:I've got a job on the strength of it.
Speaker:Yeah.
Speaker:How old are you?
Speaker:Oh yeah.
Speaker:And it was when I was 17.
Speaker:Yeah, back in the day maybe, but, not now.
Speaker:unless you're a stock broker and how many people get jobs as a stock broker?
Speaker:So they look at their grades now.
Speaker:okay.
Speaker:so that was just an article in there talking about the widening
Speaker:gap and, you know, private schools and the funding of it.
Speaker:It's Australia's version of gun control, isn't it?
Speaker:It's just a crazy system that we have here, and people get so tribal about
Speaker:their school and they loved their school and there is something to it
Speaker:where they'd be really cranky with the government that pulled the funding mm-hmm.
Speaker:That made it tough on their old school.
Speaker:Are there, are there that many?
Speaker:I don't know.
Speaker:I think it's another one of these public services that shouldn't be outsourced.
Speaker:Mm.
Speaker:And that we should be resuming them.
Speaker:We should be going, what, what's the school worth?
Speaker:How much money have we given you to upgrade the school facilities?
Speaker:We'll take that off.
Speaker:And how much of that land was given to you for free?
Speaker:And there you go.
Speaker:Here's some money back.
Speaker:Or just stop the subsidy and they won't be able to continue as a business.
Speaker:And they'll actually, well, the bias is a failing business, correct?
Speaker:Yeah.
Speaker:But then they'll sue you for investor state protection.
Speaker:Yeah.
Speaker:They'll, they'll sell all their, all the private schools will move to Singapore
Speaker:and then see you under an investor state.
Speaker:That's about the only thing they could do, Joe.
Speaker:You're right.
Speaker:But, but yeah, that's what they, that's what the government should
Speaker:do, is just pull the funding and say that's what they could do with the
Speaker:hospitals is simply say, we're not still gonna provide this funding.
Speaker:We're gonna whack up a big building over here, and we're not gonna provide funding
Speaker:to you, and you are gonna collapse, and we'll pick up the scraps later on.
Speaker:It'll never happen.
Speaker:But that's a theory anyway.
Speaker:Look.
Speaker:so, what's this one from Bronwyn?
Speaker:I've written an interesting article recently written by some
Speaker:educational researchers about the public versus private issue.
Speaker:They identified a large number of private schools, which they labeled cruiser
Speaker:schools cuz they are failing to improve the position of their students based on
Speaker:nap plan and other data, and therefore offer poor value for money, both parents
Speaker:of their students and the taxpayer.
Speaker:yes, David Gillespie has a book on schools.
Speaker:In fact, there is an interview with David on this, on this very podcast.
Speaker:Just search for it somehow and you'll, David Gillespie in the
Speaker:search bar of your podcast app.
Speaker:And it's all about choosing schools and how there are good private schools
Speaker:and there are good public schools.
Speaker:And he says you need to look at the, the results, statistics and, figure it out.
Speaker:But just because it's private, Doesn't necessarily mean it's a great school.
Speaker:Right.
Speaker:and Sim Budgie says, I'm a private school educated Catholic education.
Speaker:yep.
Speaker:Okay.
Speaker:Our friend Alison, is Alison in the chat there anywhere?
Speaker:I haven't seen her name come up.
Speaker:I haven't seen, I Hello to Alison and her mother, Bev, who listens with her,
Speaker:might be in the car at some stage.
Speaker:So Allison listen with Mother.
Speaker:Yes.
Speaker:Five years ago, Allison told the Australian tax office that the Scripture
Speaker:Union Queensland, who the people who employed chaplains, appeared to be
Speaker:misusing their school ministry funds deductible gift recipient status
Speaker:because they were giving people tax deductible receipts for donations.
Speaker:And the problem was that the.
Speaker:Tax deductible status was specifically for donations to provide religious
Speaker:instruction in government schools.
Speaker:Meanwhile, chaplains, of course, are prohibited under the scheme from
Speaker:providing religious instruction.
Speaker:So Scripture Union was offering tax deductible status for the donations,
Speaker:supposedly cuz the donations were for religious instruction.
Speaker:Meanwhile, under a scheme in which they were prohibited from
Speaker:providing religious instruction.
Speaker:and it turned out that the Morrison government offered a sort of, indemnity,
Speaker:an in an exemption, sort of just a sort of a government overruling,
Speaker:if you like to say, give them this special tax deductible status.
Speaker:Even though they don't really qualify is the reason for it.
Speaker:Mm-hmm.
Speaker:And fortunately, one of the few good things that the labor federal government
Speaker:has done on a very short list when it comes to secularism is they refused
Speaker:to extend that special arrangement.
Speaker:And so scripture Union are back to being subject to the laws that
Speaker:everybody else is subject to.
Speaker:gifts are no longer tax deductible and scripture Union is crime poor
Speaker:that they won't be able to offer the same number of chaplains that
Speaker:they used to Crime and River Joe.
Speaker:Sure.
Speaker:I've got a very tiny violin somewhere that I could play great work
Speaker:again, Alison, somewhere, someday they'll erect a statue for you.
Speaker:Alison, one of Queensland and Australia's.
Speaker:Best of secular activists for sure.
Speaker:So, yeah, there you go.
Speaker:It's only taken five years.
Speaker:Alison's in it.
Speaker:She plays the long game.
Speaker:There we go.
Speaker:Fantastic stuff.
Speaker:and there's a lovely article in The Guardian by Paul Karp explaining all that.
Speaker:So, so that was great work for Alison.
Speaker:Great result.
Speaker:And, another small victory for secularism hasn't been a lot of 'em, but that's one.
Speaker:We'll take what we can get.
Speaker:Right.
Speaker:you've, it wouldn't be a podcast episode, Joe, without a poll about the voice.
Speaker:No.
Speaker:Yeah.
Speaker:Last time we were talking about a news poll.
Speaker:A news poll was quite, Different to what we'd previously been looking
Speaker:at, which was essential poll.
Speaker:A news poll was really giving quite a negative prognosis
Speaker:for the voice referendum.
Speaker:Now there is an essential poll out and I think Joe, what's happened
Speaker:is essential before didn't offer a don't know or unsure option, which
Speaker:they've decided to put in now.
Speaker:So overall, according to the essential, it's 47.
Speaker:Yes.
Speaker:43 no and 10% unsure.
Speaker:So I'm pretty sure that's a drop from where they were before.
Speaker:cuz it was seemed to be a lot close.
Speaker:It was in the sixties before.
Speaker:Mm-hmm.
Speaker:Like so.
Speaker:So yeah, that's the current essential pole.
Speaker:I say brackets if unsure.
Speaker:Which way are you currently leaning towards?
Speaker:Mm.
Speaker:well on this graph it's just got 10% unsure.
Speaker:Yeah.
Speaker:I dunno.
Speaker:Yeah, you're right.
Speaker:I dunno what that means.
Speaker:anyway, still not looking good for the voice.
Speaker:in terms of states, they show Queensland as a clear no, but, no clear nos in the
Speaker:other states, but lots of don't knows.
Speaker:And unsures, even New South Wales, they have as 45.
Speaker:Yes.
Speaker:44, no, with 11% unsure.
Speaker:So under news poll, new South Wales was a clear yes, but under essential.
Speaker:Not so clear was that, and males of course, more likely
Speaker:to say no compared to females.
Speaker:Young people more likely to say yes.
Speaker:So news was going shock hora now more women than men, or is it women
Speaker:were also more likely to say no?
Speaker:Mm.
Speaker:Under touting, touting something about women saying No voting.
Speaker:No.
Speaker:Mm.
Speaker:Well, under this essential poll, females 49%.
Speaker:Yes.
Speaker:40% No males.
Speaker:47%.
Speaker:No.
Speaker:44%.
Speaker:Yes.
Speaker:There we go.
Speaker:Mm-hmm.
Speaker:young people are a yes.
Speaker:Old people are a no.
Speaker:Sure.
Speaker:Carra.
Speaker:Mm.
Speaker:And Labor and Greens voters are Yes.
Speaker:Coalition voters are no minor parties and independents.
Speaker:Big nos.
Speaker:Yeah.
Speaker:I suspect we make up the 18%.
Speaker:which 18% was that Joe Green?
Speaker:No.
Speaker:Voters.
Speaker:Oh, the green.
Speaker:No.
Speaker:Voters.
Speaker:Yes, indeed.
Speaker:Indeed.
Speaker:That's us.
Speaker:and that's, we can say that because Scott's not here and correct.
Speaker:Scott is just never gonna vote green.
Speaker:It's interesting that Scott aligns with the greens on this particular,
Speaker:is she, I know Scott aligns with the greens on nearly everything.
Speaker:Yes.
Speaker:He just refuses to, to admit it to himself.
Speaker:Yes.
Speaker:They easily The most secular.
Speaker:Yes.
Speaker:when it came to the school funding, let me go back to the school funding.
Speaker:well, I was talking before about, you know, funding for private
Speaker:schools outweighing funding for the, public schools, the Greens education
Speaker:spokesperson, penny Alman Payne.
Speaker:So the gap in funding between private and public schools that
Speaker:created one of the most unequal and segregated school systems.
Speaker:In the O E C D quote, it's clear that the implementation
Speaker:of gonski has been a failure.
Speaker:By no measure.
Speaker:Can anyone say a decade later, our school funding model is working.
Speaker:It's a twisted and perverse system that is widening the gap between
Speaker:rich and poor kids and lowering average student performance.
Speaker:You'll never get a labor education spokesperson.
Speaker:God using language as Franken.
Speaker:Fearless as that.
Speaker:Scott has got a vote, rings whether he likes it or not, if it's true to
Speaker:his ideology, education and health.
Speaker:It's this, this whole federal, state funding fiasco.
Speaker:Mm mm Yeah.
Speaker:It, it either needs to be all federal or it needs to be all state.
Speaker:Yeah.
Speaker:Well, in any event, whoever is funding it needs to abide by principles of public
Speaker:education, secular public education.
Speaker:Mm-hmm.
Speaker:So, and the only party talking that way are the greens.
Speaker:I don't see this current labor, federal education minister doing anything.
Speaker:Even though he was raised in a public school, he's just,
Speaker:there's, there's no talk at all.
Speaker:No, nothing encouraging from them.
Speaker:So, yeah.
Speaker:Okay.
Speaker:this one's from Caitlyn Johnston.
Speaker:she read a, a thing in the new article about the Instant Pot, a
Speaker:popular electronic pressure cooker whose parent company recently
Speaker:filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy.
Speaker:There we go.
Speaker:A pressure cooker manufacturer, Joe filing for bankruptcy.
Speaker:Why would that be your thought?
Speaker:First thoughts might be that must be making a dodgy pressure cooker.
Speaker:no, no.
Speaker:I, the CVD groups talk about the instant part and it has a dedicated following.
Speaker:It's kinda like, Oh, what's the expensive, the magic mix that cooks
Speaker:and does the thermo mix thing?
Speaker:The thermo mix is very much like a thermo mix, except it's the 10th of the price.
Speaker:There you go.
Speaker:Yeah.
Speaker:Are you a sous V guy?
Speaker:Are you?
Speaker:Yeah.
Speaker:Yeah.
Speaker:Oh, so you've got the thing with the thermometer, it turns in thing off.
Speaker:Yes.
Speaker:On and off.
Speaker:Okay.
Speaker:And you are, what are your slow cooking in your sous v?
Speaker:steaks generally, but also, chicken is incredibly tender.
Speaker:Mm.
Speaker:and scrambled eggs are really, really nice.
Speaker:Okay.
Speaker:That's why you can get chicken breast that is still moist.
Speaker:Mm.
Speaker:If you cook it in a sous V as opposed to how it normally wants to dry out.
Speaker:Yes.
Speaker:Mm-hmm.
Speaker:I don't have one, it's just another gadget I don't have room for, but I
Speaker:can understand that You have one joke.
Speaker:Yeah.
Speaker:Okay.
Speaker:So, yeah, instant pot.
Speaker:what doomed the Instant Pot?
Speaker:How could something that was so beloved sputter.
Speaker:Is the arc of kitchen goods long, but bends towards obsolescence.
Speaker:Business schools may someday make a case study of one of Instant
Speaker:pot's vulnerabilities, namely that it was simply too well made.
Speaker:Once you slapped down your $90 for the Instant Pot Duo seven
Speaker:in one, you were set for life.
Speaker:It didn't break, it didn't wear out, and the company hasn't introduced
Speaker:major innovations that make you want to level up as a customer.
Speaker:You were one and done, which might make you a happy customer, but is hell on
Speaker:profit and growth performance metrics.
Speaker:making a quality product that lasts a long time instead of quickly going
Speaker:obsolete or turning into landfill will actually drive you into bankruptcy.
Speaker:Yeah, it's sad.
Speaker:so much these days.
Speaker:You know, when I grew up, you'd repair things with a soldiering Iron.
Speaker:Mm.
Speaker:And now it's just not cost effective to crack open the seal.
Speaker:Mm-hmm.
Speaker:Because the goods are so cheap and labor is expensive.
Speaker:A lot of things don't make sense.
Speaker:Joe, I was in Cole's supermarket the other day.
Speaker:Mm-hmm.
Speaker:A packet of like salt vinegar, kettle chips was, Joe, is that 135 grand pack?
Speaker:it's 165 grand pack.
Speaker:It would've cost if it wasn't on special.
Speaker:Mm-hmm.
Speaker:$6 something.
Speaker:It was on special.
Speaker:Okay.
Speaker:Normal price is $6 something.
Speaker:I looked at that and was like, there's no way I'm buying that.
Speaker:I'm just a humble podcaster.
Speaker:I can't afford it.
Speaker:Yeah, exactly.
Speaker:But we also needed a new frying pan.
Speaker:Mm-hmm.
Speaker:Three aisle down.
Speaker:You get this fantastic Teflon coated, large frying pan for $15.
Speaker:Yeah.
Speaker:And I'm just going, this just doesn't add up where this measly bag of chips.
Speaker:Is nearly $6 50 and get an entire frying pan for 15.
Speaker:It just, it's like when you see milk is like three liters for a bit over $3.
Speaker:Yeah.
Speaker:And, and then, you know, 650 grams of water is $3.
Speaker:Life's not fair, Joe, when it comes to pricing.
Speaker:We, we've got friends who are a d dairy farmer, and you remember
Speaker:they were doing the whole mm-hmm.
Speaker:Liter for a dollar.
Speaker:They were staying effectively.
Speaker:It was bleeding the farmers down in, Eastern Victoria.
Speaker:Mm-hmm.
Speaker:They were really suffering under that because they weren't, they
Speaker:were just not making any money.
Speaker:Mm-hmm.
Speaker:Yeah.
Speaker:I think they were losing.
Speaker:And the problem is the, the supermarkets are, are effective monopolies.
Speaker:Yeah.
Speaker:Cuz who else are you gonna sell to?
Speaker:And so when the supermarkets say we're selling your product at
Speaker:this price, Take it or leave it.
Speaker:Yep.
Speaker:And that's why, when they were looking at inflation in Australia, we, a lot of our
Speaker:industry, there's few players involved.
Speaker:Mm-hmm.
Speaker:And, so yeah.
Speaker:Calls a bit of back again.
Speaker:Yeah.
Speaker:Yeah.
Speaker:So, too many oligopolies.
Speaker:But anyway, that's an interesting one.
Speaker:Instant pot.
Speaker:if you're making a product that's just, too good, then
Speaker:it's not a recipe for success.
Speaker:So, planned obsolescence, take it, you know, about, just trying to remember
Speaker:the name of it, the light bulb cartel.
Speaker:And it sounds like a conspiracy theory.
Speaker:This, this is, an interesting story.
Speaker:Yeah.
Speaker:Back in the 1920s or thirties, a group of light bulb manufacturers,
Speaker:the, the lifespans of light bulbs had been increasing and increasing.
Speaker:Mm-hmm.
Speaker:and they decided that actually this was not good for profits.
Speaker:And so they'd got together and made an agreement that none of them were
Speaker:going to create a light bulb that lasted more than a thousand hours.
Speaker:And in fact, if they did, they had to pay a fine to the cartel
Speaker:for every additional hour.
Speaker:Obviously this was in secret cuz this purely breached, anti, I don't know,
Speaker:trading law at the time, at the time.
Speaker:Maybe not, maybe that sort of behavior introduced laws like that.
Speaker:But certainly there is, there is actual proof of collusion between
Speaker:manufacturers to set and control the price with planned, planned obsolescence.
Speaker:Mm.
Speaker:And in fact, there's an electronics guy who I follow was
Speaker:talking about l e d light bulbs.
Speaker:And saying that there are some that are sold, I think in Dubai or one of the uae.
Speaker:Mm-hmm.
Speaker:and effectively they run the light bulbs at half the power
Speaker:that they're sold elsewhere.
Speaker:Right.
Speaker:And that gives you a 10 times lifespan.
Speaker:Okay.
Speaker:So when he gets his light bulbs, he pulls them apart, changes a bit of the
Speaker:electronics inside and derates them and runs them at about half power.
Speaker:And he says they just last forever.
Speaker:They, they deliberately run them hot.
Speaker:Oh, okay.
Speaker:Yep.
Speaker:So they burn out.
Speaker:Well, no, it makes them more, cheaper to buy, but of course
Speaker:they burn out much more quickly.
Speaker:There you go.
Speaker:Nothing would surprise me.
Speaker:Mm.
Speaker:Let's finish with a little bit of race and class discussion.
Speaker:Just to finish things off with, this was an article by Shannon Burns in Ian.
Speaker:It's an old article, but it's all sort of in preparation for the, the massive
Speaker:Indigenous Voice podcast now anticipated to be eight and a half hours long when
Speaker:I get to it, but, actually I'm reading an interesting book at the moment.
Speaker:Race, monogamy and other Lies.
Speaker:They told you Busting Myths about Human Nature by Augustine Winters.
Speaker:I might have that one, right?
Speaker:Is that because I mentioned it to you or you just that one I think anyway?
Speaker:No, it would've been around monogamy.
Speaker:I have Oh, okay.
Speaker:Grabbed various.
Speaker:That's upside down.
Speaker:Yeah.
Speaker:That's doing a mirror image or something, isn't it?
Speaker:Yeah.
Speaker:Right.
Speaker:So, anyway, it's interesting because it's talking about culture and
Speaker:what is culture and how race is.
Speaker:A myth, but culture isn't.
Speaker:And culture is real for people in it.
Speaker:But you know, human behavior is a combination of genetics and culture,
Speaker:but it's not just genetics plus culture.
Speaker:There's a real intertwining and intermixing and interrelationship
Speaker:that's quite complicated.
Speaker:And I think it goes a long way to trying to think about indigenous issues,
Speaker:is trying to think about culture.
Speaker:It is, after all just an ideology like religion.
Speaker:How dare you say that?
Speaker:Mm.
Speaker:So reading that, anyway, just on this article, got a few stories in it.
Speaker:We'll finish off with this one.
Speaker:he says, I spent much of my childhood in Northwestern suburb
Speaker:of Adelaide that was for decades, predominantly white and working class.
Speaker:in the 1980s, the new influx of migrants and refugees from Vietnam, Cambodia, and
Speaker:China settled there in large numbers.
Speaker:Mansfield Park also boasted an extensive collection of public
Speaker:housing, which ensured that underemployed Anglo Australians like
Speaker:my parents, were well represented.
Speaker:So that paints a good picture, white working class, new
Speaker:Asian migrants, Adelaide.
Speaker:it was here that I became ashamed of my family's racist attitudes.
Speaker:My father and stepmother used racist language privately, but got along
Speaker:well with our neighbors, all of whom were Vietnamese or Chinese.
Speaker:They referred to these as the good ones, while unknown ones were not to be trusted.
Speaker:Slopes and nips were not taboo words in our household.
Speaker:Yet my parents would've denied that they were racist for using them.
Speaker:To their minds, the language you employed did not define you.
Speaker:I suspect the shame I felt about my parents' racism
Speaker:spraying mostly from experience.
Speaker:The bulk of my friends were Vietnamese and Chinese, and their family
Speaker:seemed more admirable than mine.
Speaker:My attitude was therefore a product of intimacy and experience rather than
Speaker:abstract notions of morality or equality.
Speaker:I had an opportunity as a child that my parents who had grown up poor
Speaker:among working class whites never had.
Speaker:I also had the chance to see myself through migrant eyes, and what I saw
Speaker:was often confronting poor whites were scorned by more than a few of
Speaker:the Chinese and Vietnamese migrants.
Speaker:I came to know, especially the hardworking self-sacrificing parents
Speaker:who were deeply invested in their children's education and upward mobility.
Speaker:They made it clear that I was not the kind of friend they wanted for their sons.
Speaker:Heard that one before Joe?
Speaker:Mm-hmm.
Speaker:Hardworking.
Speaker:Asians going Don't want you hanging around that lower class white scum.
Speaker:They're not the people for you.
Speaker:Oh, I can believe that.
Speaker:I can believe it as well.
Speaker:Why not?
Speaker:At the time, I was ashamed of my parents walked hostilities.
Speaker:But after migrating into middle class lifestyle, I've become less judgmental.
Speaker:Here I've discovered that unlike my parents, very little is imposed on me
Speaker:speaking here as a middle class person.
Speaker:Now we are never confronted by aggressive people as we go about
Speaker:our daily business, and we enjoy a prevailing sense of safety and certainty.
Speaker:For precariously employed unskilled laborers, the prospect
Speaker:of competing against a recent migrant for a job is inevitable.
Speaker:While for middle class people, it's only a remote possibility.
Speaker:In short.
Speaker:As sort of the middle class that he's now entered into, our empathy
Speaker:and values are largely untested.
Speaker:he goes on, I might skip that bit.
Speaker:as an aspirational teenage lumpen, I learned to embrace a working class ethos.
Speaker:It was a simple experience, experiential lesson.
Speaker:Whenever I allowed myself to feel like a victim, I fell into
Speaker:paralysis and deep poverty.
Speaker:Whenever I took pride in my capacity to work and endure,
Speaker:things got slightly better.
Speaker:One worldview worked the other didn't.
Speaker:says, at university, I discovered that this ethos didn't apply.
Speaker:A season of despair, would not send middle, a middle class
Speaker:teens spiraling into a life.
Speaker:Of drug aled indigen, they could simply brush themselves
Speaker:off and enroll again next year.
Speaker:Strong class enforced safety nets meant that self-pity could be
Speaker:accommodated and victimhood could even form part of a functional identity.
Speaker:This is a part I found interesting coming up.
Speaker:Indeed, the willingness to expose your wounds is another sign of privilege.
Speaker:Those for whom injury has a use value will display their injuries.
Speaker:Those for whom woundedness is a survival risk won't.
Speaker:As a consequence, middle class grievances now drown out lower class pain.
Speaker:This is why the wounded lower classes come to embrace conservative discourses
Speaker:that ridicule middle class anguish.
Speaker:Those who cannot afford to see themselves as disadvantaged are
Speaker:instinctively repulsed by those who harp on about disadvantage.
Speaker:it's true enough.
Speaker:I was in a men's group with, an islander guy.
Speaker:Mm-hmm.
Speaker:and we were all talking about our woes.
Speaker:and he said, I, I just don't come from a, a place where men
Speaker:could express their feelings.
Speaker:Right.
Speaker:Yeah.
Speaker:I, I'd be torn to shreds if I was to say any of this.
Speaker:Yes.
Speaker:And it wasn't that they didn't have any problems.
Speaker:Mm.
Speaker:Just that they weren't allowed to show any form of weakness.
Speaker:Yes.
Speaker:Or they would be the fact that you could, you could, you could, not celebrate.
Speaker:Well, some people almost do celebrate what some people do celebrate, but
Speaker:certainly harp on about your disadvantage is a sign of privilege to some is,
Speaker:is kind of what the argument is here.
Speaker:To some extent.
Speaker:You really.
Speaker:Really suffering.
Speaker:And you're underprivileged, you can't talk about it.
Speaker:you can't show that weakness.
Speaker:you're actually in a privileged position if you can.
Speaker:Yeah.
Speaker:Yeah.
Speaker:She's struggling.
Speaker:Vulner vulner abilities.
Speaker:Interesting.
Speaker:Mm.
Speaker:goes on about a section on speech here, which, eh, why not?
Speaker:We've got a few minutes.
Speaker:This is be the last thing.
Speaker:The rules of speech are habitually negotiated in the working class
Speaker:world in ways that many of my middle class friends would find shocking.
Speaker:The factories I worked in typically employed at least a couple of rough
Speaker:speakers who would use cunt in the way that the rest of us used mate.
Speaker:They were upgraded whenever they swore within the hearing of customers, but
Speaker:that was the extent of the surveillance.
Speaker:It was also understood that if they performed their job well
Speaker:and behaved decently, their rough manners would not count against them.
Speaker:How is it.
Speaker:That middle class progressives are unwilling or unable to make similar
Speaker:adjustments in the working class context In particular, it's what you physically
Speaker:do, what you make, the observable physical impression that counts.
Speaker:That is the native language, the one they are fluent in and the one they trust.
Speaker:And that language often conflicts with working class speech or attitudes.
Speaker:And he tells his story.
Speaker:I was working in a recycling center for some years.
Speaker:One of my workmates was a kid called Ricky.
Speaker:I regarded him as a low life brute, and he regarded me as a real following sissy.
Speaker:We were both right.
Speaker:Every week, an elderly Chinese man brought his bottles and cans to us.
Speaker:He couldn't speak English, which tends to frustrate racist.
Speaker:And Ricky was duly irritated.
Speaker:One morning, the man who had difficulty walking accidentally put his car into
Speaker:gear while he was half out the door and still tangled in his seatbelt.
Speaker:His legs went sideways and dragged onto the ground as the car took off,
Speaker:and he struggled hopelessly to pull them in or to reach the brakes or
Speaker:to loosen the seatbelt to escape.
Speaker:The car was only a few feet away from me, but all I managed was an incoherent
Speaker:shout and an uncertain jog as it picked up speed and headed for the main road.
Speaker:Ricky dashed past me, jumped into the man's lap, grabbed the steering
Speaker:wheel quickly, found the brakes.
Speaker:He then helped the man outta the car, checked he was uninjured and
Speaker:knelt with his arm around him as he cried and shook on the ground.
Speaker:When the man was calm enough to stand, Ricky pulled him to his feet, told
Speaker:him to take care, and then walked away muttering fucking Asian drivers.
Speaker:It wasn't a perfect performance, but it got the job done.
Speaker:He says, my parents were the racist.
Speaker:my parents were racist in private speech, but not in action.
Speaker:Did that make them secret racist?
Speaker:Who hid their racism from the wider world?
Speaker:Or were they non-racist who played with racist speech, or a bit of both?
Speaker:Who can possibly say?
Speaker:My worry is that by conflating racist or offensive speech or attitudes with racist
Speaker:or offensive actions or activism, we push people like my parents and Ricky, over
Speaker:to the wrong side of the political fence.
Speaker:Anyway, I thought that was a good story.
Speaker:Some good ideas to bear in mind.
Speaker:Yeah, I mean, I, I have always, come from a culture where
Speaker:you do play with these ideas.
Speaker:You tell the shocking jokes.
Speaker:Not because you truly believe the underlying concepts.
Speaker:Mm-hmm.
Speaker:But because the underlying concepts are so shocking, that's what makes the joke.
Speaker:Mm-hmm.
Speaker:That, that, that, that the idea behind it is so sickening and so depraved that, oh
Speaker:my god, you can't say that sort of thing.
Speaker:Mm-hmm.
Speaker:and I had a boss who came in, he'd come from the sales team and he went,
Speaker:it's so different working here because somebody walks through the door and you
Speaker:say, no, fuck off, but you'll help them, whereas the sales team will promise
Speaker:you the world and deliver nothing.
Speaker:Yeah.
Speaker:Good example, Joe.
Speaker:Yeah.
Speaker:You think that's Australian?
Speaker:You, you said your sales manager came from somewhere else and
Speaker:that was a surprise to him.
Speaker:Well, thi this was actually in Jersey, but Right.
Speaker:where was he from?
Speaker:He was Dutch.
Speaker:Okay.
Speaker:But, but he was saying our sales team.
Speaker:Were very much about the outward image.
Speaker:Mm-hmm.
Speaker:but did it didn't follow through, they didn't care.
Speaker:Yes.
Speaker:Whereas we actually cared about the customer experience, but, but we put on
Speaker:this outward uncaring face that if you didn't know, and you took seriously.
Speaker:Yeah.
Speaker:Yeah.
Speaker:The, the best answer is to start with a no and work to a Yes.
Speaker:Because people feel happy.
Speaker:Yeah.
Speaker:Whereas if you go, certainly, what can I help you with?
Speaker:Oh no, I can't do that.
Speaker:People feel let down.
Speaker:Yes.
Speaker:Yep.
Speaker:Mm.
Speaker:Might be something tied in with the Australian thing where people, the
Speaker:more friendly and matey you are with somebody, the more abusive you'll be.
Speaker:Mm.
Speaker:And Americans will find that quite shocking.
Speaker:I, that these mates are abusing, just putting each other shit on each other.
Speaker:Yeah.
Speaker:All the time.
Speaker:Instead of positive, loving, warm words.
Speaker:That is an Australian trait as well, I think.
Speaker:Yeah.
Speaker:I was on a training course in England with a friend of mine.
Speaker:Mm.
Speaker:and he was, I was his customer, but I'd known him for a few years and the boss
Speaker:of their company came out, the boss's wife came out to teach us some software.
Speaker:And so I'm sat in class just taking the piss out of him.
Speaker:He couldn't really respond because I was the customer and therefore,
Speaker:but she said, stop at you two.
Speaker:I don't, don't wanna have to send you outside for fighting.
Speaker:And I just look at her going, what is she smoking?
Speaker:And she's going, why are you being so mean?
Speaker:And it's like, cuz he's my friend.
Speaker:Yes.
Speaker:This is normal.
Speaker:Yes.
Speaker:There you go.
Speaker:But yeah, she was deep South American and all, all politeness.
Speaker:Mm-hmm.
Speaker:And she couldn't understand that friends would talk to each other like that.
Speaker:Mm-hmm.
Speaker:So there you go.
Speaker:Speech, in different cultures.
Speaker:Yes.
Speaker:Can mean less than actions and can intentionally be the opposite of
Speaker:what it's actually meant to be.
Speaker:On the face of it, there might be some underlying subtext
Speaker:there that is missed by people.
Speaker:Well, a a lot of the Asian cultures where the concept of face is true mm-hmm.
Speaker:Where you are very happily say, yes, yes, yes.
Speaker:Mm-hmm.
Speaker:Or I'll think about it, which actually means no, but you can't
Speaker:possibly say no to someone.
Speaker:Mm-hmm.
Speaker:Yes.
Speaker:I think in indigenous culture that's a thing as well.
Speaker:Where can possibly, I think some footballers were found when they
Speaker:were in environments, that they couldn't say no to certain things.
Speaker:Like, you've gotta be here on Sunday or something for a special training thing.
Speaker:And like, they didn't know how to say no because culturally that just
Speaker:wasn't something they could do so well.
Speaker:That was, something that was raised in the courts.
Speaker:Mm.
Speaker:Was the fact that aboriginal people, when a question is put to
Speaker:them, are taught to be deferential.
Speaker:Yes.
Speaker:Mm.
Speaker:and therefore, you know, did you commit this crime?
Speaker:Mm-hmm.
Speaker:they're instead of outright.
Speaker:No.
Speaker:Yeah, exactly.
Speaker:Yes.
Speaker:Yeah.
Speaker:There we go.
Speaker:Culture must be understood.
Speaker:Mm, yes.
Speaker:Right.
Speaker:Well, dear listener, hope you enjoyed the story.
Speaker:Scott will be with us next week provided his NBN is operating fixed.
Speaker:Yeah.
Speaker:And, we can talk more about culture cause I reckon I'd be
Speaker:finished this book by then.
Speaker:So I'll get into the weeds.
Speaker:I bit of culture thanks in the chat room for your comments.
Speaker:and there've been good ones and good on you, Alison, for a victory
Speaker:during the week of some sort there.
Speaker:And we'll talk to you all next week.
Speaker:Bye for now.