Speaker:

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:

Hello and welcome.

Speaker:

Yes, we're back again.

Speaker:

We're a day early.

Speaker:

It's Monday night and we're doing the podcast.

Speaker:

The reason is that my wife is turning 60 this week, so we're going away

Speaker:

with the kids and I'll be up somewhere near Montville tomorrow night.

Speaker:

Celebrating that.

Speaker:

And so we've pushed forward the podcast and here we are.

Speaker:

So if you've made it into the chat room to join us, congratulations.

Speaker:

We'll do our best to entertain you.

Speaker:

I'm Trevor a k a, the Iron.

Speaker:

Fist with me as always, Scott, the Velvet.

Speaker:

Glove.

Speaker:

Good day.

Speaker:

Trevor.

Speaker:

Good day.

Speaker:

Joe Goodday listeners.

Speaker:

I hope everyone's well.

Speaker:

And Joe the tech guy.

Speaker:

Evening all.

Speaker:

So, yeah, looks like we might have a problem with Facebook

Speaker:

with this live stream.

Speaker:

It was coming up with error signals, but we'll see what happens with that.

Speaker:

So on the agenda, look, there's not, is there a lot happening in

Speaker:

politics and news around the world?

Speaker:

robo debt, report came out from the Royal Commission, so we'll talk about that.

Speaker:

We've got the USA deciding that it's perfectly fine to send

Speaker:

cluster bombs to the Ukraine.

Speaker:

Talk about that.

Speaker:

NATO wants to expand into Asia cause.

Speaker:

It's perfectly normal for the North Atlantic Treaty

Speaker:

organization to be involved in Southeast Asia and the Pacific.

Speaker:

Mm-hmm.

Speaker:

our friend Paul Keening had something to say about that.

Speaker:

and oh, what Australians think of Americans was in a poll, depending how we

Speaker:

go, because those things may not take that long and it might force me to actually

Speaker:

start talking about some indigenous issues and we might end up talking about

Speaker:

culture and what culture is and how culture is mixed up in the idea of race.

Speaker:

And these are concepts that we need to understand if we're to talk

Speaker:

coherently about the whole debate over the voice and the yes and the no.

Speaker:

So I'm fearful, hopeful that I told Yes.

Speaker:

Culture is what your got HA has in Australia doesn't, right?

Speaker:

Yes.

Speaker:

So that's where we're heading on this one.

Speaker:

See what ra rabbit holes we end up in.

Speaker:

If you're in the chat room and there's one person there right now,

Speaker:

you can make a comment, and we'll try and incorporate if we can.

Speaker:

Alright.

Speaker:

Ah, Scott, robo debt.

Speaker:

A fairly scathing report has come down about politicians and public servants.

Speaker:

What was your thoughts about the report?

Speaker:

I thought that, the winner of it goes to that, no, I can't even remember

Speaker:

which, which, publication it was.

Speaker:

But someone had actually come out and said that, if Peter Dutton, if Peter Dutton

Speaker:

doesn't get sick of his politics, Lark, he could go and become a comedian because

Speaker:

he was suggesting that it was wrong.

Speaker:

That Shorten and Albanese were trying to make politics outta the whole thing.

Speaker:

Mm.

Speaker:

You know, and I think that hit the nail right on the head because,

Speaker:

you know, it's got these, it's got their fingerprints all over it.

Speaker:

The Tories were completely involved in it.

Speaker:

They pushed it and they were behind it.

Speaker:

So I think everything that went wrong with it has to be sheeted home to them.

Speaker:

Yep.

Speaker:

They started it.

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

They're in control of it.

Speaker:

It is entirely their responsibility.

Speaker:

Now, they did lie and that type of thing to try and make out the Labor Party

Speaker:

started it, but clearly they didn't.

Speaker:

Mm-hmm.

Speaker:

It's, it was a bloody disgrace actually, you know?

Speaker:

Mm.

Speaker:

I cannot believe that the public service has been so thoroughly

Speaker:

muted that they would, that no one actually stuck their hand up and said,

Speaker:

minister, you can't just do this.

Speaker:

Mm.

Speaker:

You know, because I'm on a very good wicket, but there was six

Speaker:

months where I had to claim the doll because I was unemployed.

Speaker:

Now had they have actually done an averaging on my income that I earned

Speaker:

in the second six months of that year.

Speaker:

Mm.

Speaker:

Then they would've come back and said, well, you've clearly over, you've clearly

Speaker:

claimed when you shouldn't be claiming.

Speaker:

Mm.

Speaker:

Now that is wrong.

Speaker:

And it's just one of those things that I cannot believe that no one

Speaker:

actually put their hand up and said, minister, you can't do this.

Speaker:

The sort of people, the sort of people who are victims of this

Speaker:

were the least equipped to mm-hmm.

Speaker:

Battle against it.

Speaker:

Mm-hmm.

Speaker:

Mm-hmm.

Speaker:

You could just imagine that they were the ones who were like, oh my God, you

Speaker:

know, their ability to go through their records and sort things out and deal with

Speaker:

the department and have the time to do that, they were the, the least equipped.

Speaker:

So see for bugger, if it had actually happened to me, I would've ignored it.

Speaker:

And I just would've said, look, if you want to come after her and sue

Speaker:

me, sue me, cuz I'll stand up in court and tell you where you're wrong.

Speaker:

Mm-hmm.

Speaker:

That's no problem at all.

Speaker:

You know, and I wouldn't have been intimidated, but.

Speaker:

I've got a fairly good head on my shoulders and that type of stuff.

Speaker:

I would know exactly what to say.

Speaker:

You were not a typical Dole recipient.

Speaker:

No, I wasn't.

Speaker:

Mm-hmm.

Speaker:

I wasn't.

Speaker:

Mm-hmm.

Speaker:

I got it for that six months when I got tapped on the shoulder up

Speaker:

here in Rockhampton, you know?

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

It's just, but the people that did actually, you know, I cannot believe

Speaker:

that they were that intimidated that they took their own lives.

Speaker:

Well, they clearly did.

Speaker:

I mean, it's not Yeah, I know.

Speaker:

Mm.

Speaker:

I I think if you weren't in a good space to begin with and that's

Speaker:

why you were receiving government assistance, this could very well

Speaker:

be what tipped you over the edge.

Speaker:

Oh, exactly.

Speaker:

And, and it was all about punishing poor people.

Speaker:

It was seeing be, being seen to be tough whilst not actually caring about

Speaker:

the billions of dollars hidden in The Bahamas or wherever it was that,

Speaker:

Malcolm Turnbull had his dollars.

Speaker:

But, but you know, you can just feel that sort of, that Christian fingerprint

Speaker:

on all this where if you are poor, then there's this Christian judgment

Speaker:

that you are not favored by God and that godly people are hardworking, well

Speaker:

organized, and if you're not that then you are ungodly and, and a slacker.

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

And, and yeah, that was clearly in Morrison's head when he

Speaker:

kicked the whole thing off.

Speaker:

Mm-hmm.

Speaker:

Mm-hmm.

Speaker:

As the whole thing was turning bad, the public servants were

Speaker:

cowed to their masters and didn't want to, stand up to them.

Speaker:

So they were, you know, properly for career advancement reasons, wanting to

Speaker:

try and achieve what their political masters wanted rather than what was

Speaker:

good and proper country control best.

Speaker:

Mm.

Speaker:

Mm.

Speaker:

It's one of those things, you know, I heard on the podcast this morning

Speaker:

that I was listening to, I think it was the, I can't remember, it's called

Speaker:

the ABC Daily News or whatever it is.

Speaker:

There was a, they went into it in depth and they had a sound bite from Morrison

Speaker:

and that sort of stuff, and he was beating his chest saying that, 80, you

Speaker:

know, however many million go out to work every day and that type of thing.

Speaker:

They expect that we're gonna have a tough cop on the beat over welfare recipients.

Speaker:

Mm-hmm.

Speaker:

You know, the whole language of it was really very sickening actually.

Speaker:

Meanwhile, they throw money at people like Barnaby Joyce for a non-existent report.

Speaker:

Mm-hmm.

Speaker:

Pricewaterhouse Keepers and other consultancies for nothing.

Speaker:

Mm-hmm.

Speaker:

people running detention centers with Harvey.

Speaker:

Zero people in there, Harvey, like they'll throw money at the other end.

Speaker:

Mm-hmm.

Speaker:

Willynilly.

Speaker:

And yet these people.

Speaker:

It is disgusting and well will things change?

Speaker:

You know, hopefully out of all this, it will depend a little bit on what

Speaker:

happens to some of the players in this down the track, whether they

Speaker:

end up, in jail or other things.

Speaker:

I was gonna say, I'm glad to see that criminal charges have been recommended.

Speaker:

Yes.

Speaker:

So hopefully down the track in two or three years time or something.

Speaker:

When a minister is putting pressure on a public servant, the public servant

Speaker:

will think, well, I don't want to be.

Speaker:

who's this lady in this one?

Speaker:

Who's the main culprit?

Speaker:

Campbell.

Speaker:

Catherine Campbell, their names is, is I am not going to be

Speaker:

another Catherine Campbell.

Speaker:

And so no.

Speaker:

Mm Um, hopefully what happens to her is an example that scares a lot

Speaker:

of public servants over the next decades into doing the right thing.

Speaker:

That's how things will change, I think.

Speaker:

Change the culture.

Speaker:

we'll see.

Speaker:

So, yeah, Dutton you mentioned was sort of suggesting that labor was too gleeful

Speaker:

in the way it was talking about this issue and incredibly, James Campbell

Speaker:

of NewsCorp hard right wing NewsCorp guy basically blasted Dutton for

Speaker:

suggesting it, which was interesting.

Speaker:

And I think there's some elements of NewsCorp and the right which have given

Speaker:

up on Dutton, and I think that's right.

Speaker:

He, he may not survive Unelectable.

Speaker:

Yes.

Speaker:

I think they're just doing the sums on the popularity and, and they're

Speaker:

thinking, well, there's no points just.

Speaker:

Loyally supporting this guy.

Speaker:

Exactly.

Speaker:

You know, he, we'll drop bombs on him when we need to in order to get

Speaker:

another liberal leader and his position.

Speaker:

Fuck.

Speaker:

Who are they gonna put instead?

Speaker:

The caliber of stuff there is just horrendous.

Speaker:

Who are they gonna forget?

Speaker:

No, it's because of the success of the Teals and I don't begrudge them

Speaker:

their success because, you know, they did actually take out the

Speaker:

moderate wing of the liberal party.

Speaker:

You know, you had those, you had those moderate held seats and that type

Speaker:

of thing that were taken by them.

Speaker:

I don't begrudge them that, because I thought to myself, they had a very

Speaker:

good campaign line when they said, yes, of course you could vote for Josh,

Speaker:

but you're gonna end up with Barnaby.

Speaker:

You know, that is a very solid line for them to take.

Speaker:

They were actually, when they're actually talking to those people that had a

Speaker:

moderate voice, and they were saying to him, yes, you can vote for Josh, but

Speaker:

you're gonna end up voting for Barnaby.

Speaker:

And that is the, what's wrong with Barnaby Barnaby's an idiot.

Speaker:

He might become leader again.

Speaker:

Apparently they're not happy with Little Proud.

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

I know they're not happy with Little Proud, but you know, that that would be

Speaker:

suicide for them to go back to Barnaby Joyce, because Barnaby Joyce is an idiot.

Speaker:

Mm-hmm.

Speaker:

But an electable idiot electable in his own electorate.

Speaker:

Yes.

Speaker:

He his own electorate.

Speaker:

He's electable, but you know, he's, he actually said that

Speaker:

he takes no responsibility for what happens to the liberals.

Speaker:

But you know, they, they were actually mentioning him by name and that type

Speaker:

of thing in the, in the campaign.

Speaker:

Mm-hmm.

Speaker:

You know, he's a fucking tool.

Speaker:

Mm-hmm.

Speaker:

Well, you know, in a democracy, if people aren't performing, then

Speaker:

the voters just vote 'em out.

Speaker:

Mm-hmm.

Speaker:

Well, assuming that the voters realize that they're not performing, Yes.

Speaker:

And they get snowballed by, certain media interests.

Speaker:

Yes.

Speaker:

So I would've thought the Labor Party's got probably at least three or four

Speaker:

terms left in them because the, the liberals haven't learnt anything.

Speaker:

They have just doubled down on their nonsense.

Speaker:

You've got, Dutton talking about nuclear power.

Speaker:

He's refusing to accept that the renewable energy is cheaper than nuclear power.

Speaker:

No, no, no.

Speaker:

But nuclear power is there for a reason, because all the time

Speaker:

we're talking about nuclear power.

Speaker:

We're not talking about renewables, and it allows us to burn coal for a bit longer.

Speaker:

That's why nuclear powers there.

Speaker:

It's a distraction.

Speaker:

Distraction.

Speaker:

It's perfect.

Speaker:

Yeah, yeah, yeah.

Speaker:

I suppose anyway, it's just one of those things like, you know, but it, it, it

Speaker:

might well be a distraction, but people are actually gonna be just, they're just

Speaker:

gonna be saying, well, no, fuck him.

Speaker:

I'm just not interested.

Speaker:

So I just think to myself that, they're, they're sort of lemming le they're being

Speaker:

like lemmings and that sort of stuff.

Speaker:

They're all just stepping off in, into the, into the wild blue yonder

Speaker:

and they're not keeping an eye on where they're actually stepping and

Speaker:

they're just gonna step into the abyss of their own self-destruction.

Speaker:

Mm-hmm.

Speaker:

The only thing that'll save them is a massive recession that

Speaker:

could be sheeted home to labor.

Speaker:

And, you know, if there is a really bad crushing recession, then that

Speaker:

might shorten them to only two terms rather than three or four.

Speaker:

Well, I suppose so, but no, it's.

Speaker:

If, if people start, there's a little secret here that, you know,

Speaker:

governments don't really get that well involved in the economy.

Speaker:

Yes.

Speaker:

But it's about spinning the line that they are responsible.

Speaker:

So you're right, particularly in Australian government.

Speaker:

Mm.

Speaker:

Is, is like a little ship tossed around in a big ocean.

Speaker:

There's lots of factors at play that they can't control, but, and

Speaker:

most of them are international.

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

But certainly you can, Catherine managed in the global recession, didn't he?

Speaker:

Yes.

Speaker:

That spending stimulus did make a difference.

Speaker:

Yes, he did make a hell of a difference.

Speaker:

Now I was opposed to it at the time, but you know, looking

Speaker:

back on it, he was right.

Speaker:

Mm-hmm.

Speaker:

You know, he targeted the households.

Speaker:

He's, you know, he, what was it targeted the households early, wasn't it?

Speaker:

Or something like that.

Speaker:

It was the line basically put cash in the hands of people who

Speaker:

were gonna spend it, not say it.

Speaker:

Exactly.

Speaker:

Yes.

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

I remember going to a trade show around that time when people

Speaker:

had just got their checks.

Speaker:

That was one of the greatest trade shows I've ever been to.

Speaker:

People were spending money like you wouldn't believe at that.

Speaker:

So it certainly boosted that economy.

Speaker:

So, yeah.

Speaker:

So anyway, we'll see what happens.

Speaker:

Along those lines, internationally, things are not going well for, Ukraine

Speaker:

and the United, I don't know about that.

Speaker:

Well, okay.

Speaker:

They are holding their own, you know, they haven't done, the

Speaker:

counter offensives gone nowhere.

Speaker:

I know.

Speaker:

The counter Offensives gone.

Speaker:

No.

Speaker:

And, but Oh yeah.

Speaker:

The Allies, they could be waiting for a, the Allies in the

Speaker:

First World War went nowhere.

Speaker:

Yeah, yeah.

Speaker:

Oh, D-Day landing got the first a hundred meters and then bogged down for a month.

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

And this is, this is what happens in wars.

Speaker:

Yes.

Speaker:

Unfortunately, it takes time.

Speaker:

Sorry, I take it back.

Speaker:

I take it back, things are obviously going well for Ukraine ly.

Speaker:

Well, no, I mean, they're not obviously going well for Ukraine and it's

Speaker:

all Ukraine just gonna happen for them over the next, if they were up

Speaker:

against the second world's, the third largest military in the world and

Speaker:

everything else, and everyone thought it would be over in two or three days.

Speaker:

What are we, 16 months later?

Speaker:

They're still fighting

Speaker:

anyway, according to, reports.

Speaker:

Well, America's agreed from from rte.com Yes.

Speaker:

To supply.

Speaker:

America's agreed to supply cluster bombs.

Speaker:

Mm.

Speaker:

It has, yes.

Speaker:

To the Ukrainians, but the cluster bombs that were going outta date

Speaker:

anyway, and that had manufacturing tolerances that were fairly shit a and

Speaker:

have probably only got worse over time.

Speaker:

Yes.

Speaker:

So they're not getting the shiny new cluster bombs.

Speaker:

They're getting the old ones, which will, half of which won't explode and will leave

Speaker:

unexploded ordinance all over the, yes.

Speaker:

The, the, the countryside until some kid decides to pick it up and play with it.

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

Or a farmer runs a tractor over it or something like that.

Speaker:

Yes.

Speaker:

So, my goodness me, what be a decision the Soviet occupation by

Speaker:

then, anyway, won't it, Trevor?

Speaker:

Well, that's, if they think that, sure.

Speaker:

But they don't, they think they're gonna win and that they're going

Speaker:

to litter their own territory.

Speaker:

The Ukrainian territory with unexploded cluster bombs.

Speaker:

Yes.

Speaker:

What a terrible decision.

Speaker:

What a terrible decision.

Speaker:

And it just continues.

Speaker:

So, but it's all right because none of them are signatories to the

Speaker:

whatever it is, arm's convention that limits cluster bombs.

Speaker:

Yes.

Speaker:

America's not a signatory to that.

Speaker:

So they haven't breached an international treaty by supplying the cluster bombs.

Speaker:

Presumably.

Speaker:

Ukraine isn't either.

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

Ukraine isn't the US isn't.

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

There we go.

Speaker:

Want miss that when you need St.

Speaker:

Diana to go and bang some heads together?

Speaker:

Mm-hmm.

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

She was big on the, she was big on the cluster bombs.

Speaker:

Yes.

Speaker:

Mm.

Speaker:

Right.

Speaker:

That's Ukraine.

Speaker:

NATO has been talking about setting up office, a branch

Speaker:

office in Tokyo, in Japan.

Speaker:

Mm.

Speaker:

And the French, fortunately have been saying that's not a good idea.

Speaker:

And we, the French, when have the French.

Speaker:

Ever gonna get something that was suggested by another country?

Speaker:

Sometimes their recalcitrant works out well.

Speaker:

I think so.

Speaker:

So yeah.

Speaker:

I mean, it is the North Atlantic Treaty organization designed

Speaker:

to point missiles at Russia.

Speaker:

Hey, come on.

Speaker:

The French are only new members that don't count.

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

And they're talking about creating this shop in Japan.

Speaker:

What possible purpose could they have except mischief?

Speaker:

Yep.

Speaker:

E exchange of, technologies.

Speaker:

Mm-hmm.

Speaker:

What do you think, Scott, is it legitimate for NATO to, to, join up

Speaker:

with Japan and other Asian countries?

Speaker:

I don't think it's, I don't think it's legitimate to have these.

Speaker:

You know, post-Soviet, alliances anymore.

Speaker:

Mm-hmm.

Speaker:

You know, because the, it was clearly a, it was clearly designed in the

Speaker:

forties and that type of thing as a, as a countermeasure to the Soviet Union.

Speaker:

So now that the Soviet Union no longer exists as, as a countermeasure

Speaker:

to Russian expansionism.

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

So you're saying it shouldn't be a NATO even in, in Europe?

Speaker:

Is that what you're saying it, Scott?

Speaker:

No, I don't think so.

Speaker:

Yeah, I don't think, I don't, I think it's outlived its purpose.

Speaker:

Okay.

Speaker:

Yep.

Speaker:

And having said that, though, the, the Russians are clearly expansionary

Speaker:

and that type of thing, so I think that, it's quite legitimate for the

Speaker:

Europeans to guard against that.

Speaker:

And Finland has joined up, and Sweden has too.

Speaker:

So you're saying it's legitimate to have a NATO then?

Speaker:

Yes, it is now, because, you know, you've got the, you've got.

Speaker:

Prior to this invasion, it had become irrelevant.

Speaker:

Yes.

Speaker:

It had.

Speaker:

Now it's, it had become irrelevant regain Now, now it's become, now it's

Speaker:

become relevant again because the Russians clearly can't be trusted.

Speaker:

Right.

Speaker:

Okay.

Speaker:

we've diverted there just back to Asia.

Speaker:

so I don't think it's, I don't think it's right for them to set up anywhere in Asia

Speaker:

though, because it depends if they're trying to recruit countries, probably not.

Speaker:

Mm.

Speaker:

But what, what are they doing there is the question.

Speaker:

Mm.

Speaker:

Well, well I would've thought that if, if you've got anything about, sharing

Speaker:

of technology and that type of thing, you could do that very easily over,

Speaker:

you know, you just gotta fly people and that sort of stuff and have,

Speaker:

have a meeting and, yeah, exactly.

Speaker:

Maybe we could look at what the NATO Secretary General Jens

Speaker:

Stoltenberg said about the matter.

Speaker:

He sounds go Norwegian or he, Dutch Dunno where he is from.

Speaker:

He said, we should not make the same mistake with China.

Speaker:

And other authoritarian regimes.

Speaker:

He said his comment is seen as drawing a link between the Ukraine and Taiwan.

Speaker:

Quote, what is happening in Europe today?

Speaker:

Could happen in Asia tomorrow.

Speaker:

He said, so the head of NATO wants to be there because they don't wanna

Speaker:

make the same mistake with China that they did with Russia, seemingly.

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

Okay.

Speaker:

I can understand that.

Speaker:

But don't you think it would have more legitimacy if the, if the Chinese were

Speaker:

contained by a alliance between the United States, India, someone local, someone

Speaker:

local in the area like the Americans?

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

Well, we're really close.

Speaker:

You know, Americans pacification.

Speaker:

I know the Americans aren't local, but they are, they are the, they

Speaker:

are now the second superpower in the world and that type of thing.

Speaker:

So I think they've got to have some sort of presence.

Speaker:

and Japan and the Philippines are both American colonies.

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

There we go.

Speaker:

It's their back.

Speaker:

It's their backyard's, their backyard from America.

Speaker:

Well, is America's backyards because they have expanded, because

Speaker:

nowhere is not their backyard.

Speaker:

Deepest, darkest.

Speaker:

Africa is America's backyard.

Speaker:

As far as America's concerned.

Speaker:

Well, America's not really involved in Africa because

Speaker:

Africa won't have him there.

Speaker:

Mm.

Speaker:

anyway, the French president, Emmanuel Macron has put his foot down insisting

Speaker:

such geographical expansion would risk shifting the alliance remit too far

Speaker:

from its original North Atlantic focus.

Speaker:

He's not in favor of it.

Speaker:

and he reckons the Japanese authorities have told them that they're not

Speaker:

actually attached to it either.

Speaker:

So according to Macron, the Japanese don't want to, don't wanna be involved in it.

Speaker:

So see where that ends up.

Speaker:

I've got no problem with that.

Speaker:

I mean, it's just one of those things, you know, like I said, if they really

Speaker:

want to get involved, then they can have meetings and that type of thing

Speaker:

that, you know, we've got, Albanese is on his way over there now, isn't he?

Speaker:

Over there to NATO meeting?

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

Why is Al, why, why is Australia involved in a NATO meeting?

Speaker:

I don't know.

Speaker:

Well, Australian New Zealand are part of five eyes.

Speaker:

Mm-hmm.

Speaker:

Five eyes.

Speaker:

five eyes.

Speaker:

But as opposed report to NATO via the US and the uk.

Speaker:

In the uk Yeah.

Speaker:

Just cuz in the last few decades there was never a war that going on that

Speaker:

Australia didn't wanna get involved in.

Speaker:

So, How it seems.

Speaker:

Mm, trust if you want a straight shooter on foreign policy trust, Paul Keating.

Speaker:

He came out with a statement as he's seen, what's happening with NATO in

Speaker:

Japan and Albanese heading over there.

Speaker:

And, according to Paul Keating, ex Prime Minister, president Macron

Speaker:

of France is right to warn NATO away from any expansion into Asia.

Speaker:

He says, the Europeans have been fighting each other for the better

Speaker:

part of 300 years, including giving them the rest of us two world wars.

Speaker:

Exporting that malicious poison to Asia would be akin to Asia,

Speaker:

welcoming the plague upon itself.

Speaker:

And of all the people on the international stage, the supreme fool amongst them

Speaker:

is Jens Stoltenberg, head of nata.

Speaker:

Stoltenberg by instinct and by policy, is simply an accident on its way to happen.

Speaker:

And, according to heating, I, I think he's got a bit of a selective memory.

Speaker:

Heating has.

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

Right.

Speaker:

And it's like, you know, Japan didn't invade China and

Speaker:

the whole of Southeast Asia.

Speaker:

Mm-hmm.

Speaker:

No, nothing to do with Europe at all.

Speaker:

Yes, yes.

Speaker:

Good point.

Speaker:

Well, the second World War was a global war.

Speaker:

It started in Europe, but it ended up in, it ended up in the Pacific.

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

But, but Japan invaded China in the thirties, early thirties.

Speaker:

No, I know that, that, that was, I think they got kicked off in

Speaker:

the mid thirties, didn't they?

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

Something like that before the Second World War happened.

Speaker:

Anyway.

Speaker:

Committed a few atrocities along the way.

Speaker:

Yeah, yeah.

Speaker:

No, the rape Apian King was in the thirties.

Speaker:

Mm-hmm.

Speaker:

You know?

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

And it was, it was said at the time in Time Magazine that it was, it was

Speaker:

very hard to get excited about because it Yellow Man Killing Yellow Man.

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

You know, it's, Yeah.

Speaker:

Whereas with these Ukrainians, they're white guys like us.

Speaker:

Yes, exactly.

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

Can't have that.

Speaker:

No, no, no.

Speaker:

They're not.

Speaker:

They're Russians.

Speaker:

Yes.

Speaker:

Keating says about Stoltenberg in February, he was drawing parallels

Speaker:

between Russia's assault on Ukraine and China saying we should not

Speaker:

make the same mistake with China.

Speaker:

That is, that China should be superintendent by the West.

Speaker:

And strategically circumscribed, olberg in his jaundice view, view overlooks

Speaker:

the fact that China represents 20% of humanity and now possesses the

Speaker:

largest economy in the world and has no record of attacking other states.

Speaker:

Unlike the United States whose bidding Stoltenberg is happy to

Speaker:

do, Stoltenberg conducts himself as an American agent rather than

Speaker:

a leader for European security.

Speaker:

And Emmanuel Macron is doing the world a service.

Speaker:

Putting a spike into Stolbergs wheel is Paul Keating.

Speaker:

It doesn't hold back.

Speaker:

He's been no quoted by a number of people internationally.

Speaker:

You enjoyed that.

Speaker:

we talked about Calvary Hospital mm-hmm.

Speaker:

Last week and how the a c t government, how about the poor

Speaker:

Catholics were being pro persecuted?

Speaker:

Yes.

Speaker:

Yet again, meanwhile, the sisters who actually run the place, were

Speaker:

really looking to get out and get into sort of end of life hospice.

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

Which is what they're suited for, rather than running a multidisciplinary hospital

Speaker:

anyway, which had to provide, you know, abortion and also, reproductive services.

Speaker:

Yes.

Speaker:

So crosses attached to the hospital were taken down, and the Goulburn

Speaker:

Archdiocese, Archbishop Christopher Pra was not happy and he said, The very

Speaker:

first thing a totalitarian government does when it seizes Christian assets,

Speaker:

the very first thing they all do, they take down the crucifix when the

Speaker:

religious cage is shaken by a wolf.

Speaker:

When the cross is taken down, we realize how important our

Speaker:

religion is when it's under attack.

Speaker:

And right now, today, over at the public hospital, today is Sunday of all days.

Speaker:

They picked is the Christian gathering time.

Speaker:

They're taking the very big blue cross from outside the

Speaker:

public hospital down today.

Speaker:

There was a collective wrenching going on, but there was a sense of

Speaker:

hope because they realized you can take down our physical CR of fixes,

Speaker:

but you'll never take away the cross.

Speaker:

Jesus's cross inside my heart.

Speaker:

All very dramatic except the a c t Health Minister said, taking

Speaker:

down the cross was entirely to the decision of the Calvary Healthcare.

Speaker:

We've been very clear about that whole time.

Speaker:

Any decision around those items, how and when they were removed

Speaker:

was entirely the dec decision of Calvary and Calvary admitted.

Speaker:

Yeah, it was our decision.

Speaker:

We just decided to take 'em down cuz we thought my moms mow well,

Speaker:

sounds like some Marion going on there, doesn't it?

Speaker:

Oh, that's right.

Speaker:

Love to be persecuted even when you're not.

Speaker:

Yes, they, they do love it, don't they?

Speaker:

Motivation complex is one from the early days.

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

Mm.

Speaker:

Okay.

Speaker:

That's, maybe that's the last we'll hear of Calvary Hospital in Christians.

Speaker:

Maybe.

Speaker:

We'll see.

Speaker:

This is not gonna be the last pair of Christians.

Speaker:

No more polling.

Speaker:

this one, there were polls from, pew Research and from the Lowe Institute.

Speaker:

And Broman, our listener, Broman, brought it to my attention that

Speaker:

there was an article in Crikey.

Speaker:

And basically from these polls of particular interest is that Australian

Speaker:

skepticism is alive and well.

Speaker:

Australians are the only group in the Asian Pacific region that thinks

Speaker:

China is now the world's top power.

Speaker:

The others thought it was the US and Australia's attitudes to the US

Speaker:

have been strongly influenced, not in favor of the US by the Trump era.

Speaker:

So we think less of the US and we think China is more powerful

Speaker:

when some of our neighbors haven't yet come to that conclusion.

Speaker:

I don't know.

Speaker:

I looked at some of the results in these polls and some of

Speaker:

the stuff was still worrying.

Speaker:

looking at countries that have a positive opinion of the us, Australia was one of

Speaker:

those 52% favorable, 47% unfavorable.

Speaker:

Now be used towards the us.

Speaker:

one question was, asking whether USA interferes in the

Speaker:

affairs of other countries.

Speaker:

All countries basically thought that was the case in Australia, 79% of

Speaker:

people said yes, the US interferes in the affairs of other countries.

Speaker:

20% of Australians said, no, they don't.

Speaker:

I mean, what rock or cave are these people living under or in if you don't

Speaker:

think the US is involved in interfering in the affairs of other countries?

Speaker:

But my Murdoch's an American, so obviously yes.

Speaker:

And and then the question was that the US contributes to peace and

Speaker:

stability around the world and 61% of Australians think that and 38%.

Speaker:

disagree.

Speaker:

So, huh.

Speaker:

That was part of the polling of Hugh Research and the lower poll basically

Speaker:

showed, that people now are thinking in the ch in Australia, people thinking

Speaker:

China is more of a threat than a security than an economic partner.

Speaker:

But if, if there is a war involving Taiwan, they don't want

Speaker:

Australian troops sent there.

Speaker:

So, the majority of Australians don't.

Speaker:

So, so anyway, those are some more polls that came through on Crikey.

Speaker:

Nothing startling about that.

Speaker:

And where we're at, we're at 8 0 5 already.

Speaker:

25 minutes left.

Speaker:

Goodness me, I'm probably gonna have to talk about indigenous affairs and culture.

Speaker:

Racist.

Speaker:

Yeah, the loins.

Speaker:

Everybody.

Speaker:

I've been reading a book.

Speaker:

culture, the story of us from cave art to K-Pop by Martin Honer.

Speaker:

It's been a good one, and the more I think about the indigenous affairs,

Speaker:

the voice, and it's trying to work out culture and how culture fits into

Speaker:

things and how we think about culture.

Speaker:

So here's an idea.

Speaker:

You could look at culture in two different ways.

Speaker:

One culture belongs to the people born into it and must be defended

Speaker:

against outside interference.

Speaker:

Culture is a form of property that belongs to the people who live it.

Speaker:

That's one way of looking at culture, and I would suggest that's a view of

Speaker:

culture that's being encouraged for Australian indigenous communities.

Speaker:

The second way of looking at culture is that culture is made not only from

Speaker:

the resources of one community, but from encounters with other cultures.

Speaker:

Culture evolves through circulation and reading this book where he traces

Speaker:

the history of different cultural EV events throughout human history.

Speaker:

It's pretty clear that the second version is what actually happens.

Speaker:

That culture is not from one community.

Speaker:

It has encounters with other communities, other cultures, and

Speaker:

it evolves through circulation.

Speaker:

That's what actually happens.

Speaker:

And you get rare events where culture is frozen in a kind of a time capsule, and

Speaker:

that's when it is through certain events.

Speaker:

Frozen out from interaction with other cultures.

Speaker:

So, have you guys heard of the Sve cave in France?

Speaker:

It's one of the, of the oldest extent cave art.

Speaker:

Yes.

Speaker:

Yes.

Speaker:

So it's one of the oldest examples of cave art.

Speaker:

And it exists because, tens of thousands of years ago, the entrance to the

Speaker:

cave was blocked by a landslide.

Speaker:

Mm-hmm.

Speaker:

And that stopped people going in and defacing it, defacing it, or

Speaker:

putting up their own drawings, their own drawings, or Yes.

Speaker:

You know, had that cave been open since that time, there's no way the

Speaker:

original cave art would've survived the influx of other cultures and

Speaker:

the influence of other people.

Speaker:

The other example would be, say, Pompeii.

Speaker:

With the ashes falling on Pompeii, effectively freezing that culture

Speaker:

in place and excavations now allow us to see what it was at that time.

Speaker:

And there was another example where the, parents of, Tutton Carmen, it

Speaker:

basically left the city that they were living in, created a almost

Speaker:

a new religion in a new city.

Speaker:

And when they passed away, that city was abandoned and, and covered.

Speaker:

And, and it wasn't like there was then a new population in there that,

Speaker:

that then adjusted everything and it sort of remained frozen in time.

Speaker:

So, so the sort of examples that we have of cultures that have survived intact,

Speaker:

untouched for a long period of time.

Speaker:

Come about because they haven't had contact with other cultures.

Speaker:

Mm-hmm.

Speaker:

Because that's what happens.

Speaker:

Other cultures come in, build upon use, bits and pieces,

Speaker:

destroy, and change cultures.

Speaker:

They're not they don't stay fixed.

Speaker:

They don't remain the property of a group.

Speaker:

So in his book, this guy says, if we wanna talk properly about culture,

Speaker:

we need a different language from property and ownership, because

Speaker:

that's not how culture actually works.

Speaker:

And I think one of the issues that we have with indigenous people and their

Speaker:

plight and the way we think about things is, appears to me that there is an

Speaker:

insistence on maintaining cultural purity and trying to almost freeze in time and

Speaker:

take ownership of it for a select group and build a wall around it, if you like.

Speaker:

So well, if that's true, then they just all modern civilization.

Speaker:

Yes.

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

But they'll take on bits and pieces, exactly when it suits.

Speaker:

But to the, to the dismay of the purists, I guess.

Speaker:

but I'm guessing even the purists are not animistic, they're probably

Speaker:

deepened faithful Christians.

Speaker:

Yes.

Speaker:

That's the hypocrisy of it, right, Joe?

Speaker:

Yes.

Speaker:

So, here's one I, the more I look at it, the more I think of, indigenous call

Speaker:

for a voice and culture is, is there's a lot of similarities with religion.

Speaker:

And what if it was a religious group wanting special representation?

Speaker:

and what if they were saying, only we Christians know what Christians

Speaker:

need and we need a voice made up solely of Christians because we're the

Speaker:

experts on the needs of Christians.

Speaker:

That's what happens in the uk.

Speaker:

Mm-hmm.

Speaker:

Many of us would suggest that the best thing for Christians would be to hear

Speaker:

from some friendly atheists to cause them to question their religious belief.

Speaker:

You know what, it'd be good for you lot.

Speaker:

Here's some information that calls into question your here ideology.

Speaker:

But there's no way that would be accepted in indigenous culture where

Speaker:

people are allowed to say, you know what, there's probably some parts of

Speaker:

indigenous culture that might probably be leading to some of the issues that

Speaker:

the indigenous people are facing.

Speaker:

And here's from a study, official Australian study of some sort.

Speaker:

I, I got a paragraph from it.

Speaker:

So, Family structure for indigenous Australians extends beyond the

Speaker:

nuclear family concept, commonly seen in non-indigenous contexts

Speaker:

to encompass extended family and community in a collective system of

Speaker:

resource sharing that is a testament to their rich cultural heritage.

Speaker:

this traditional practice underscores community resilience and unity, though

Speaker:

it does present challenges in balancing resources in the face of income disparity.

Speaker:

So basically family structure in indigenous Australians is more

Speaker:

than just the nuclear family.

Speaker:

And what you have is a collective system of resource sharing.

Speaker:

I and Heri Ali says the same about Somalis in her book.

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

Mm.

Speaker:

Talking about the, the culture shock she felt Yes.

Speaker:

Coming into Western Europe a and where historically she would've gone to the

Speaker:

tribe to get resources if she was.

Speaker:

On hard times.

Speaker:

Hey, was the government giving her free money, right?

Speaker:

What idiot idiots they were, right?

Speaker:

So an article that was speaking about the Canadian experience from the

Speaker:

sky, I'll quote from where he goes.

Speaker:

I will not dwell too much in the space of the cruel, cynical, and utterly disastrous

Speaker:

government decisions that have led to the current state of affairs in indigenous

Speaker:

communities, Canadian indigenous communities, but perhaps the single

Speaker:

largest enduring difficulty originates in the fact that land on indigenous

Speaker:

reserves is not owned by residents in their capacity as individuals.

Speaker:

Rather, it is controlled collectively so no person or family can buy,

Speaker:

sell, lease, or mortgage their property in the normal manner that

Speaker:

the rest of us take for granted.

Speaker:

This has had a crushing effect on business formation and land improvement, and

Speaker:

is one of the reasons why the housing stock on reserves degrade so quickly.

Speaker:

Since no one owns their house in the normal way, there is little

Speaker:

financial incentive to invest in any even basic upkeep activities

Speaker:

such as mold eradication.

Speaker:

indigenous people are no less industrious or and ambitious than anyone else in

Speaker:

Canada, but they often must leave their reserve communities to find their fortune.

Speaker:

To remain on reserve is in many ways, to exist as a surf within a welfare state.

Speaker:

So, so the question of how to resolve this difficulty, he says,

Speaker:

obviously does not fall to me.

Speaker:

It's something that indigenous communities must determine themselves.

Speaker:

It's a wrenching issue because a capital style land ownership system

Speaker:

would allow non-indigenous outsiders to buy these communities out, thus

Speaker:

undermining the goal of preserving authentic indigenous culture.

Speaker:

In some cases, both economic and cultural goals can be achieved, but in other

Speaker:

communities, especially in remote areas, There will be wrenching choices to

Speaker:

be made pitting jobs against culture.

Speaker:

And that strikes me as one of the key problems for indigenous communities

Speaker:

is, this communal ownership problem.

Speaker:

And that makes sense to me.

Speaker:

And I can see that that is part of, inherited sort of cultural trait.

Speaker:

And my concern is, or my thinking is that the people who would be

Speaker:

on the voice, their business is the indigenous culture industry.

Speaker:

If there is a point where you should say, you know what, time to ditch a

Speaker:

couple of cultural features because it's not working in a modern.

Speaker:

21st century situation.

Speaker:

That might be something that has to be said and I think should be said, but the

Speaker:

very people likely to be in the voice are the least likely to admit to that need

Speaker:

to abandon parts of a culture because they're in the industry of possessing,

Speaker:

protecting, owning, fencing off culture.

Speaker:

The, the same has been said in the UK about the Muslim representative groups.

Speaker:

Mm.

Speaker:

Who are very entrenched in the status quo.

Speaker:

Mm.

Speaker:

And so the government consult with members of the community.

Speaker:

Mm.

Speaker:

Who say, well, of course all Muslims don't want gay people in their area.

Speaker:

And the gay Muslims say, well, hang on, you haven't asked us.

Speaker:

Mm-hmm.

Speaker:

But the people in charge are the least likely to be liberal in the community.

Speaker:

They, they want to defend the status quo because that's what

Speaker:

gives them power and authority.

Speaker:

Yes, yes.

Speaker:

So that's what I see as, one of the problems of, of, of deciding that, a

Speaker:

purely indigenous based voice is going to solve all the problems when I think one

Speaker:

of the real major fundamental problems for indigenous people is something that

Speaker:

these people are least likely to address.

Speaker:

their motivations are for the opposite.

Speaker:

So, and it would need an outsider perhaps, to say that who will not

Speaker:

be allowed to be on the voice.

Speaker:

Found an old article by Kenon Mallick just talking about race and culture

Speaker:

and, and how essentially race has been abandoned as a concept and kind

Speaker:

of replaced by culture, which is a backdoor way of, of speaking racist race.

Speaker:

Yes.

Speaker:

I can't really, like, we know that there's no difference between people.

Speaker:

Racially, we know scientifically that there's nothing in the dna.

Speaker:

We know people are people, so we can't rely on a racial difference argument.

Speaker:

But what's happened instead is people have gone, well, of course these people

Speaker:

have a different culture and that cultural difference is used in the

Speaker:

same way that race is used or used.

Speaker:

Race used to be used, so.

Speaker:

In this article he says, last week, Sandeep and Rina Mander were

Speaker:

denied the chance to adopt a child.

Speaker:

Amandas are of Indians seek heritage.

Speaker:

Though both born in Britain and the only children needing adoption were white.

Speaker:

So Indians seeks in Britain not allowed to adopt a white child.

Speaker:

That's bloody ridiculous.

Speaker:

And, it speaks to a broader confusion about the relationship

Speaker:

between race and culture.

Speaker:

A confusion that afflicts anti-racist as much as it does racists.

Speaker:

Few people these days claim that whites and Indians are racially incompatible,

Speaker:

but many argue that whites and Indians belong to distinct cultures and possess

Speaker:

and possess discreet identities.

Speaker:

Many argue too that especially for children, it's important

Speaker:

not to undermine their sense of identity or create confusion

Speaker:

about their cultural attachments.

Speaker:

Has anybody seen splitting airs?

Speaker:

The Eric Idle film?

Speaker:

No.

Speaker:

No.

Speaker:

In idle film?

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

He's, he's raised by an Indian family, and he claims proclaims very loudly that

Speaker:

he's a, he's an Indian, and he has these fantastic Bollywood dream sequences.

Speaker:

How long ago was this movie made?

Speaker:

Oh, in the 1980s, right?

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

According to Maleek.

Speaker:

Just continuing with this story, it's plausible, the council imagines

Speaker:

that to be white is to belong to a particular culture, and that non-whites

Speaker:

belong to the other cultures.

Speaker:

A white child can only be brought up by white parents because otherwise he or

Speaker:

she would grow up in the wrong culture.

Speaker:

I mean, we have that here in Australia.

Speaker:

With indigenous children.

Speaker:

Mm-hmm.

Speaker:

so, let me just see,

Speaker:

talking about the right here.

Speaker:

So, traditionally a race was seen as a group of human beings linked by a set of

Speaker:

fundamental characteristics, unique to it, that was the traditional view of race.

Speaker:

In the post-war world, this concept of race disintegrated

Speaker:

racial categories were shown to possess little scientific validity.

Speaker:

and after the Holocaust, the idea of racial inferiority or

Speaker:

superiority, became a big no-no.

Speaker:

But if old fashioned racial science was buried, many of the racial thinking,

Speaker:

assumptions of racial thinking survived.

Speaker:

It's just that humanity could be divided into discreet groups.

Speaker:

Each of which possessed a set of unique characteristics

Speaker:

shaped an individual's identity.

Speaker:

These ideas came to be race, recast in the language, not of biology, but of culture.

Speaker:

Insured cultural differences replaced racial differences, and this was

Speaker:

done by both the left and the right.

Speaker:

So Marie Lappen in France would say on the right wing, we not only

Speaker:

have the right but the duty to defend our national personality and

Speaker:

have our right to our difference.

Speaker:

So defending the purity of the French culture and from the left,

Speaker:

different minority groups, are seen as possessing different cultures,

Speaker:

identities, and ways of thinking, and.

Speaker:

To confront racism and oppression.

Speaker:

Many argue on the left, requires a defense of each group's distinct

Speaker:

identities, which is really just repeating the Marie Lapin argument

Speaker:

and on both the right and the left.

Speaker:

Many now view cultures as fixed bounded entities, each the

Speaker:

property only of certain people.

Speaker:

Once culture was seen as providing the tools with which to open up and transform

Speaker:

the world today, many regard it more as a protective wall to shield its members

Speaker:

and to keep out unwanted visitors.

Speaker:

there we go, bear's some thoughts.

Speaker:

Think about when it comes to the indigenous question and how we

Speaker:

think about race and culture.

Speaker:

Ove.

Speaker:

Yes.

Speaker:

Ah, have I got another story here?

Speaker:

I wonder if I'll tell the Ray Halton story.

Speaker:

I've told this one before.

Speaker:

ah, I'll tell this one.

Speaker:

So that story that I just read from, Ken and Malick was on his website

Speaker:

and in the comment section was a comment by a guy called, Ray Halpin,

Speaker:

who I actually reached out to.

Speaker:

And we, and then friends on Facebook, it's like, sort of six years ago now.

Speaker:

Interesting guy.

Speaker:

He sort of ended up on the streets in, in Ireland, like as

Speaker:

a, almost as a homeless type guy.

Speaker:

And I was saying to him, do you need some money?

Speaker:

And he was like, no, no, I'll be right.

Speaker:

And he interesting guy.

Speaker:

So in response to what Ken and Malik wrote, This is in the comments by Ray

Speaker:

Helpin and he said, I'm an unskilled manual laborer, living in Dublin, but

Speaker:

I spent the 1990s working in Outback Australia as a field operative in

Speaker:

the mining exploration industry.

Speaker:

During those years, I came to befriend many aboriginal Australians, and at one

Speaker:

stage even considered proposing to one.

Speaker:

The Mabo Lands rights decision was a watershed moment.

Speaker:

From that point on, the political consciousness of many ordinary

Speaker:

aboriginal Australians really flourished.

Speaker:

Although at the time, the significance was not grasped by

Speaker:

many of the indigenous friends in Mount Isa, they resented the idea.

Speaker:

This is his Aboriginal friends in Mount Isa resented the idea that Torres Strait

Speaker:

Islanders were getting a percentage of the funding set aside by Canberra for Atsic.

Speaker:

Aborigines were the real indigenous Australians, whereas

Speaker:

Islanders were something else.

Speaker:

I found this sort of rivalry to be depressing cause the, my excessively

Speaker:

idealized way of thinking at the time, it resembled a mild form of the

Speaker:

kind of racism pervasive throughout the white Australian community.

Speaker:

Abes should have been immune from that kind of thing, given their experiences.

Speaker:

They should have known better, but they didn't.

Speaker:

They were a stubbornly human as any other group.

Speaker:

he goes on the issue of exactly what it meant to be an Australian Aboriginal

Speaker:

came, became a frequent topic of discussion around the barbecue.

Speaker:

Some of my black friends refused to join the discussion

Speaker:

because politics irritated them.

Speaker:

Others dismissed the whole idea of aboriginality and preferred to

Speaker:

concentrate on the apparently less controversial idea of common humanity.

Speaker:

There was always one, usually the one who had an arts degree from the University

Speaker:

of Queensland who pursued a degree of exclusivity that would've impressed the

Speaker:

most fastidious phenologist he'd demand to be referred to by his tribal designation.

Speaker:

Even though he often didn't know it and accused his cousins of being yellow

Speaker:

rather than black, because some of their distant ancestors turned out

Speaker:

to be Afghan Cavaliers when their cousins retaliated pointing to the

Speaker:

extraordinary number of white fellas in their accusers pedigree, he'd blanche

Speaker:

and say he was proud of all of his ancestors, but you could tell he wasn't.

Speaker:

As far as I could tell, the absurdities of black identity were as comical

Speaker:

and as potentially dangerous and tragic and veno phenol as those

Speaker:

infecting the white identity.

Speaker:

I met Australian Aborigines who adapted, adopted an identity for

Speaker:

purely cynical reasons because there was funding to be had from it.

Speaker:

Its steady work and academic kudos and compensation from mining companies, ime

Speaker:

aboriginal Australians who were purists of the most intimidating kind, who condemned

Speaker:

all whites as genocidal murderers and assumed a right to kill them wherever and

Speaker:

whatever, and felt justified in doing so.

Speaker:

these experiences are many more liked them, forced me to reflect long and

Speaker:

hard on the pros and cons of identity and into view with growing detestation,

Speaker:

the emergence of an illiberal left winging variety of identity politics

Speaker:

that in effect deferred very little from its right wing counterpart.

Speaker:

There we go.

Speaker:

Thoughts on indigenous issues.

Speaker:

All will be reexamined in a bumper indigenous episode.

Speaker:

Appear at some point.

Speaker:

Did you see Lydia Thorpe's comments?

Speaker:

I, I saw, this is 60 minutes.

Speaker:

Oh, I dunno.

Speaker:

I just saw some headlines.

Speaker:

Which comment was that, Joe?

Speaker:

Well, specifically, it, it's okay to be black and vote no.

Speaker:

and no, it doesn't make us racist.

Speaker:

Mm.

Speaker:

I, I refuse to be lumped into the same group.

Speaker:

you know, there are different reasons for voting no.

Speaker:

And you don't have to be a racist to vote.

Speaker:

No.

Speaker:

Was effectively what she was saying, she classed herself as a progressive No.

Speaker:

Hmm.

Speaker:

Is how she described it as opposed to a racist.

Speaker:

No.

Speaker:

Yes.

Speaker:

And I would describe the theories that I'm trying to espouse as a rationalist.

Speaker:

No.

Speaker:

So you can have different reasons for I, I think so, no.

Speaker:

Yes.

Speaker:

But I think we are just going to see a taring of a whole sway of the

Speaker:

country as racists, uneducated bigots.

Speaker:

Yes.

Speaker:

That's what we're gonna see and this is what's gonna happen.

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

And yeah, I've been keeping a, clipping all sorts of stuff from social media from.

Speaker:

Different people who I normally agree with on the left, and they're just going

Speaker:

to town when they talk about the racists who are contemplating the no vote.

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

one of the Facebook pages I follow was, if you're voting for no, then you

Speaker:

know it's as good as a vote for Daton.

Speaker:

Yes.

Speaker:

And I just put up, what was it, your, your logical fallacy is

Speaker:

black and white thinking, right?

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

It's, these are not two sides of the same coin.

Speaker:

You, you can vote no and not be for Mr.

Speaker:

Ton.

Speaker:

Yes.

Speaker:

So it's a complicated topic because it, it's, it's, it's, it's

Speaker:

these issues of culture and, and.

Speaker:

There's almost a religious reverence for the purity of

Speaker:

the culture being maintained.

Speaker:

And there's, well, welcome to country has just become, sorry.

Speaker:

what's, what's, yeah, it is welcome to country has become the Lord's Prayer over.

Speaker:

It has, yes.

Speaker:

And a lot of atheist rationalists who would normally object to overtly

Speaker:

rich religious happenings are quite happy to wave through Indigenous.

Speaker:

Indigenous Oh.

Speaker:

Or even spiritual.

Speaker:

Yes, indeed.

Speaker:

And it's complicated because it is a mixture of feeling sorry for

Speaker:

what has happened to the plight of modern day indigenous people who

Speaker:

are suffering mixed in with a a, A feeling of compensation for stolen

Speaker:

land of what happened to, indigenous people, you know, two 50 years ago.

Speaker:

And it's, it's that mixture of those two things that justifies a position

Speaker:

that would otherwise be unjustifiable.

Speaker:

And it's just illogical at the end of the day.

Speaker:

So we'll get to all that and we'll upset a lot of people.

Speaker:

Sorry about that.

Speaker:

That's just the way it is.

Speaker:

I get a bumper episode to come.

Speaker:

Oh, I notes are just getting longer and longer on this.

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

Which is fine.

Speaker:

You'll have to send them to me well in advance because I've gotta get across it.

Speaker:

But, I'm still leaning towards a yes vote, just to protect it from

Speaker:

the Tories more than anything else.

Speaker:

Mm-hmm.

Speaker:

But I understand where you're coming from.

Speaker:

You know, it's one of those things, it's not as easy as

Speaker:

they are trying to make out.

Speaker:

I still don't understand why Albanese wants it as bad as he does.

Speaker:

I mean, I would've thought that he could actually take a look at the

Speaker:

polls and that sort of stuff and actually sit the people down and say

Speaker:

to them, if we put this up now, there's every likelihood we're going to lose.

Speaker:

So I don't think it's a good idea for us to go ahead with it.

Speaker:

Now, I don't think he's a particularly deep thinker.

Speaker:

I think he just, no, he just thinks there's a lot of disadvantaged indigenous

Speaker:

people living in terrible circumstances.

Speaker:

And, land was stolen and the grievance of that has been

Speaker:

transferred through the generations to present day indigenous people.

Speaker:

And that's the way a lot of people on the left think.

Speaker:

And that's the thinking that he would adopt without questioning.

Speaker:

Whether that's actually logically appropriate or not, so Mm.

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

Have we heard anything from Keating over it?

Speaker:

he would be in favor of it, I would've thought, because I don't know.

Speaker:

his speech that he read Fern speech and all that, I would've thought.

Speaker:

Mm-hmm.

Speaker:

So, yeah.

Speaker:

You know, Scott, we actually spoke about this way back in episode three.

Speaker:

Really?

Speaker:

Yes.

Speaker:

Way back then.

Speaker:

Noel Pearson.

Speaker:

Yes.

Speaker:

Because in episode three we referred to an article where Noel Pearson, was

Speaker:

proposing that he wanted a voice to parliament way back then, eight years ago.

Speaker:

So yeah, as I was, bloody hell, that was working my way through the notes and

Speaker:

finding every reference we've made to indigenous matters as part of the, 10 hour

Speaker:

episode that will appear at some stage.

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

Alright, that's enough.

Speaker:

I've gotta get ready for a 60th birthday gathering.

Speaker:

Mm.

Speaker:

I hope you enjoyed that one, and, we'll be with you next week.

Speaker:

Bye for now.

Speaker:

And it's a good night from me and that's a good night from him.