[MH]
I thought that I'd voice my opinion on this email list. I don't actually
support
the Neither campaign because I don't believe that the Australian
Electoral
Commission ought to be treated as a legitimate or as anything more than
a mob of
violent thugs supporting the two major Australian political parties. But
I do
support the Neither campaign's objective of ending the political
monopoly of the
identical political parties.
[AL]
Hmmm, I guess you must have been put off from supporting the Neither
campaign by the legal advice we published concluding that the AEC was
engaged in criminal intimidation ;-)
[MH]
I don't believe that there is that much in the way of popular hositility
to the
two party system or that many Australians are even capable of rational
thought
about the electoral system. When the most popular arguement in favour of
the
Australian electoral system is that it isn't the American electoral
system it
does not indicate a thinking, interested, or critical audience. For any
kind of
meaningful reform to occur to the Australian Electoral System people are
going
to have to be made aware of what a substandard, undemocratic, and
offensive
system it is.
[AL]
Now that is a more plausible ground for not supporting the Neither
campaign. I suspect underlying our inability to really get going so far
is the feeling that it isn't really worth making a commitment to being
active in an organization that aims to smash the two party system
because that objective is unfeasible - Australians have put up with it
for years so they may be incapable of rational thought about it, so
what's the point of trying.
My view, and presumably that of anyone who does support the campaign is
that there is widespread, deep and rapidly growing hostility to the
current system which remains unfocussed not because of the lack a
"thinking, interested, or critical audience" but because of the lack of
a well organized movement with a coherent proposal to change it that is
seriously trying to make people "aware of what a substandard,
undemocratic and offensive" system it is.
It's up to us to get down to work and do that. Anybody really convinced
that it can't be done will naturally not want to join in (until we have
got far enough to prove them wrong). But we can't wait until everyone is
convinced that it can be done before starting to do it, so those who are
convinced have to make up their minds to get organized now. One of our
first tasks should be to publish clear and convincing explanations of
why we think we can win.
[AL]
>I maintain that the biggest breakthrough could come from linking a
> >demand for a representative Parliament as a real instead of phoney
> >constitutional change to a vote No campaign in the Republic
Referendum.
> >There will be widespread debate about constitutional issues in that,
the
> >media will have difficulty avoiding any mention of our role and there
is
> >a very good chance of our campaign making a real difference in
defeating
> >the turnbullies republic.
[MH]
I don't know it might just make the ALP bully boys even more determined
to put
the boot in for spoiling their Irish republican delusions. Maybe it
would be
best to support a republic on the grounds that it is a meaningless word
like
democracy.
[AL]
I am often unsure whether a statement is intended sarcastically. Either
way the above comment confirms the desirability of putting the boot back
into the ALP (and other) bully boys and spoiling their delusions.
[AL]
> >I am puzzled about why there has been no comment on my proposals
> >concerning this so far. Could people who agree or disagree about a
> >Neither Vote No campaign please say so and/or ask questions, add
> >comments about it etc.
[MH?]
> I don't think that a compromise campaign against a system that gives
> everything to one of two political parties is going to have much
sucess. I
> prefer the oppositional system that these parliamentry/legal bastards
> understand. To encourage people to participate in a system that is
hopelessly
> flawed, that some members of the ALP belive is constitutionally
required,
> while advocating some technical changes to a community that is
apathetic,
> uninterested, and uniformed.
[AL]
Not sure whether the above paragraph was MH or quoting somebody else
(but anyway,
certainly wasn't me).
Anyway, everyone will be required to either vote Yes, No or Informal or
to pay a $50 fine for not doing so. There will be widespread discussion
as a consequence of that. If we ignore that discussion or fail to take a
clear stand in it we will certainly not contribute to making the
community less "apathetic, uninterested and uninformed".
If we mobilize for a "No" vote based on demands for real constitutional
change to establish a representative legislature, and if that is a
significant factor in achieving a "No" result the ALP will certainly
want to stick the boots in and we will be recognized as a significant
opponent.
In particular demonstrating that we can have a real impact on an issue
that others think is more important than establishing a representative
legislature should be enough to convince a lot of people that we just
might be able to win other things that we think we can win.
----------------------------------------------------------------
This is the Neither public email list, open for the public and general discussion.
To unsubscribe click here Mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?Subject=unsubscribe
To subscribe click here Mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?Subject=subscribe
For information and archives goto http://www.neither.org/lists/public-list.htm
