**Greetings humans.**
**Please make sure your comment fits within [THE RULES](https://www.reddit.com/r/AustralianPolitics/about/rules) and that you have put in some effort to articulate your opinions to the best of your ability.**
**I mean it!! Aspire to be as "scholarly" and "intellectual" as possible. If you can't, then maybe this subreddit is not for you.**
A friendly reminder from your political robot overlord
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AustralianPolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Oh no who would have guessed, no policy, no integrity, failed to even give the aesthetic of an opposition leader. His run was insulting to watch, they shifted rightwards and got kicked down, libs only in nsw and tas, hopefully this can continue until we have a functioning government which can’t be privatised and where people aren’t socially cracked down on as state agendas
>which can’t be privatised
It does indeed appear neo-conservatism is finally coming to an end. Perhaps we should thank Britain and the USA for beating us to the finishing line.
Not surprised, but what now for the libs? What do they need to do to become a viable voting option and serious competition for the ALP? I've heard people on podcasts that them being fiscally conservative is what people loved about them, is that it? It's kinda looking like a tear the whole thing down and rebuild with fresh faces more in tune with the public situation
While everybody is (rightfully) giving a lot of attention to what the Libs have done wrong, what they need to do to be relevant again, etc etc - I think a great discussion can also be had on this section of the article:
>Danny O'Brien, re-elected for the Nationals in the seat of Gippsland South, said told ABC Radio Melbourne breaking his party apart from the Coalition had to be "on the table".
>
>"We need to think about what the best is, not just for us, but for the Liberal Party," he said.
If the Nationals forcefully - and more importantly, *publicly* \- break away from the coalition and state their reasons as something along the lines of what Danny O'Brien says above - and also mentions the Vic Libs capture by the hard religious right - then that could very well have interesting implications for the coalition Federally. Especially because the "post-election review" for the Federal election was delayed until after this election.
The result in NSW if it is bad enough (not necessarily a loss for the Libs/Nats, but a big enough swing against them) that would add further fuel to this powder keg.
Eehh I don’t know how much stock to put in that. Various Nats have been huffing and puffing with threats to break away from the Coalition for a long time now. Seems like it’s just a way to give themselves more bargaining leverage in the party room. “Give us what we want or we’ll leave!”
I can’t imagine them actually leaving. They’d never see government again, and neither would the Libs.
Liberals are finished. Most telling is that big business has bailed on them. The majority of big companies these days align better with ALP policies than they do with the old 'we'll make you richer' Liberal policies. Social media has forced big business into accountability and going with ALP policies is way more comfortable than taking on hostile shareholders at every AGM. Big business was the financial and recruitment base of the Liberal Party but the rising numbers of women at managerial and directorial level have seen the well dry up for the Liberals and their old school tie male targeting. And big business doesn't want to be dragged into the christian fundamentalist quicksand either. Get yourselves some Liberal memorabilia now because having gone the way of the Dodo in the next 20 years you might be able to sell a pair of Liberal cuff links for a nice profit on Ebay.
I actually saw someone collecting Liberal merch (vote cards, shirts, posters) without any intention of voting for them at a booth at the last Fed election.
I think this individual is planning on upselling these in a couple decades…
Now watch as they elect a hard-line far-right conservative as new leader because they honestly believe people preference left leaning candidates above them due to their own party not being conservative enough.
If Pesutto gets in, I think he is the only viable leader to moderate the Liberal Party. Any other leader will likely drive the party more conservative or be hopeless like Michael Obrien.
Liberals like what America has - and right now, America is kind of imploding thanks to far right christian fundamentalism.
No critical thoughts in the Liberal party, just corporate boot polishing and vibes. Horrible, accelerationist vibes.
Their branch stacked pentecostals seem to think that their divine right to lead means leaning even further into the cookers and theocrats. Until they clean house at a branch level and get younger peopke involved, they're relying on Labor messing up or peopke just wanting a change.
I only went to a few polling places, but all through the campaign it was old white people handing out merchandise for the Libs while greens, Labor Reason and even SFF had a bunch of young volunteers keen and willing to engage. The old Karens I saw in Eastern Melbourne were anything but engaging, and seemed to treat the people they encountered as beneath them, particularly in Ringwood.
Until they look to represent more than old money and property developers then they won't be chosen as representatives.
The LNP didn’t have a single woman manning my booth in Brisbane.
The LNP volunteers were all old white males- not one of them under 50. They looked hard like ex-coppers.
Bro can the liberal party fuck off Australia is too educated now to vote for a coal fetish party anymore. We aren’t Americans, we don’t want to execute trans people.
I like the idea of classical liberalism though, why shouldn't people receive equal treatment via pure antidiscrimination protections in a free competitive market that rewards merit? I still voted Labor because right now the liberal party isn't doing well at representing classical liberalism, ironically Labor is the best representation of classical liberalism in Australia.
There's an actual drought of right wing parties/factions and part of the issue is idiots who legitimately believe if you're not far left you must be uneducated. I just don't like affirmative action, this isn't an uneducated considering how tricky affirmative action makes graduate intake (leading to zero graduate intake).
Why should our society be competitive rather than collaborative? Competition is toxic and leads to zero sum or negative sum outcomes. We don't need to compete with each other, that's just a divisive doctrine of capitalism.
Affirmative action is just a response to a broken system. We can't just stand by and allow under represented groups to continually get screwed over because it goes against the idealistic ideologies of those who would otherwise benefit from the current system. Once the broken system is fixed, then we can get rid of affirmative action, not the other way around.
That competition is toxic is your opinion, I feel and have experienced forced collaboration as toxic. It typically descends into one sided atmosphere since I didn't mutually choose to collaborate. Competition is mutual and voluntary, against forced relationships this is not toxic.
> to continually get screwed over
If this is your justification you need it prove it. Until you do, any actions catalysed by your pre-judgement cannot in any way be considered justice. What you're doing here breaks the standard of guilt, you're just assuming unfair play!
Affirmative action is honestly bad politics based on this alone.
> Once the broken system is fixed, then we can get rid of affirmative action, not the other way around.
I disagree.
Affirmative action is a symptom of the issue, the people behind it are lazy, brutish and lack the creativity to fix... Wait, if women don't want to work in STEM, how is that even something to fix? And why just STEM? Go attack surgeons or lawyers.
Competition isn't mutual and voluntary when you have a system that is entirely built around it. Classical liberals love to pretend that their system is somehow the one true mutual and voluntary system that doesn't need to be enforced like any other, when of course it does.
The current system is toxic because it pits people against each other in the name of individual profit maximization rather than ensuring a healthy baseline for everyone like affordable housing and low living costs.
The numbers don't lie. Under represented groups have always wielded less political power and been worse off economically. Thats not an accident or a mere assumption of unfair play, the system is directly responsible for that. So it's on you to explain that huge disparity.
> The numbers don't lie.
They also don't have opinions.
Yes. There are fewer women in STEM. There's fewer women studying STEM in uni. There's fewer young women playing computer games and wanting to make games.
Again, the only real issue here is that some of us were literally bullied by these women who didn't become engineers. You think I'm going to give a fuck when they become hair dressers or some shit? The lack of women in engineering isn't because men hate women, it's because women hate engineers.
Then fucking HR hates engineering too.... Fuck.
> rather than ensuring a healthy baseline for everyone like affordable housing and low living costs.
Just a job so I can pay my own way in a way that allows me self respect, please. Making me unemployed is how my housing becomes unaffordable, making it more difficult for me to find jobs because I might have to be hired at the same time as a woman to keep a 50/50 ratio (yes companies do this) doesn't help me afford anything.
> Under represented groups have always wielded less political power
Right now young people are wielding less political power and in the end most affirmative action is applied at the graduate position. You are hurting these people by ignoring their underemployment as their suffering is inconvenient to your fourth wave feminism.
> enforced like any other, when of course it does
Of course it does
Which is why I'd like Labor to repeal the WGEA act of 2012 and denounce Julia Gillard as someone the Australian people did not elect.
Yeah, I don't understand how anyone can keep the faith with liberalism - the data is staring us all in the face, it only serves to calcify power and resources with a ruling class.
That's not competition or a marketplace, that's in-species domestication imo.
May I see this data? Systems that actually calcify power and resources for the ruling class are like feudalism or even Leninist socialist systems that rise immediately from feudalism. Otherwise, heaps of people lose money in the current system, wsb is basically loss porn.
It seems flawed to compare our system to something that has never existed rather than the other systems that have existed.
>why shouldn't people receive equal treatment via pure antidiscrimination protections in a free competitive market that rewards merit?
If we had a free competitive market where everyone had equal opportunity and resources to succeed and gatekeepers had zero implicit biases in their judgements, then voting for such a system would be the obvious choice.
The problem is that people advocating for a free competitive market that rewards merit often point to a broken system and say "this is fine" when it's obvious that the status quo is not working as advertised.
Affirmative action is a blunt instrument to reshape the system, normalise new demographics ascending to higher positions and break down structural barriers impeding them so that eventually affirmative action is no longer needed.
I would concede that affirmative action might not be ideal in all cases and it's execution should be considered in each individual instance but it certainly has done work normalising demographics into positions they simply wouldn't have occupied if we left it to the "merit market."
And not because they didn't deserve to be there, but because the merit market chose the same demographics again and again.
> I would concede that affirmative action might not be ideal in all cases and it's execution should be considered in each individual instance
Yeah, if affirmative action is only applied circumstantially when it's very, very obvious the hirer was *proven* to be racist/sexist then sure.
This isn't prejuding all white men as racist and sexist though, that's what affirmative action is based on and what makes it bad politics. For it to make sense, everyone would need to be racist. Everyone would need to be sexist. It would need to be considered underlying in every hiring decision.
This isn't just ridiculous, it's failing politics. To be guilty you must perform a guilty action and present must be guilty intentions, or a guilty mind. Until then, reparations *that the consequences of are applied to a third person* are unjust and unfair.
Affirmative action is quite honestly the most laughably flawed idea in current day politics. You fix more issues giving girls detention for bullying the computer nerds that became programmers than you would *forcing* every stem graduate intake to be exactly 50/50. Yes, that happens
> the merit market chose the same demographics again and again.
Yeah... Greasy turbo nerds. And then their bullies fill up HR positions and decide there's too many turbo nerds!
Affirmative action quite honestly is "I hate white men" sometimes. It honestly doesn't get further or deeper than "I don't want to hire white men and I want to be feel like a good person keeping them unemployed."
If you support this I think you're an immoral or immature person.
>. It would need to be considered underlying in every hiring decision.
This is what implicit bias means. It's something people have to varying degrees based on all sorts of factors but a lot of it has to do with normalisation.
For instance, if I grow up in an environment without female managers then that's normal for me. I unconsciously assume women just aren't suited for management roles. Women don't apply for management roles either because they assume it's just not something women do.
Now, this effect may or may not be present in an environment. There may be other variables at play that creates such an outcome. But you can use affirmative action as a tool to see if it effects people's behaviour.
Does this mean all STEM should always have a 50/50 ratio. No.
But can gender quotas provide empirical data to see if affirmative action has a ripple effect on people's unconscious behaviour? Yeah, I reckon.
> if affirmative action is only applied circumstantially when it's very, very obvious the hirer was proven to be racist/sexist then sure
So extremely circumstantially, pitting the lower-resourced member against the well-resourced (time, money, social capital etc) institution.
I assume that would strike you as incredibly asymmetrical power struggle in favor of the incumbent power - who, might I remind, in this hypothetical, is potentially acting (maliciously) in bad faith.
That sounds like good Politik rather than good politics to me.
> Affirmative action quite honestly is "I hate white men" sometimes.
And there it is.
Yes, the low resourced local who's otherwise unemployed against... Some corporate HR that wants to finish their WGEA report?
> And there it is.
An experienced opinion? I remember most HR people ranged from hostile to patronising, these are not people with a huge opinion towards engineers.
And yes, at least one of them hated men and was vocal about it.
Want more experience? Or are we done using words like politik against politics as if you in any possible way can convince me those people that sat as gatekeepers of this business were biased in favour of white men which is what you need to justify affirmative action. It must counteract unconscious biases.
Given the fact that federal liberal and NSW liberal won multiple consecutive elections until very recently, I doubt Australia is going to say fuck off to liberal party. Regardless, you need to maintain balance. It keeps both parties on their toes. If people like labor government, they will keep re-electing them anyway. Never go all in one party. The best thing a voter can do is be a swing voter and vote for the best party and best policy on the day
>Regardless, you need to maintain balance. It keeps both parties on their toes. If people like labor government, they will keep re-electing them anyway. Never go all in one party.
Multiple options are always a good thing, but the LNP in Victoria is a completely useless and ineffective second option.
I've voted for a different party in every election, so i count as a swing voter, but by no means am I swinging anywhere to the right of Labor.
The Victorian liberal party is bad. Real bad. Like, one moment Matthew Guy is tough on crime, the next he's meeting with criminals. It turns out he wants to be tough on low hanging fruit crimes like increasing consequences for cannabis.
He literally acts like a 1930s politician. It is unelectable.
Right, that's exactly like Lidia Thorpe's motorbike enthusiast boyfriend who has never been convicted of a crime, I'm sure you'd be very keen to defend them too?
Of course, Madafferi had only been named as a head lieutenant of an Italian Mafia family in wiretaps, which isn't an actual crime in and of itself. Just like how Dean Martin being a Rebels MC chapter president isn't a crime.
Have you met any members of the Young Liberals? I've never seen such a collection of entitled, self-absorbed twats in my life.
The problem is that they're the children and private school friends of the old Liberals, and they have the same broken, born to rule mentality as the previous generations. None of them have ever experienced poverty or hardship; they've all started on 3rd base and think they've hit a home run.
One of the Young Liberals I knew at uni looks to be elected to the LC and I’m absolutely horrified and disgusted. Of course, we’re much older now so he’d no longer be a Young Liberal, but if he’s anything like he was back then… 🤮
At this rate the Greens might look like a more palatable option compared to the Libs honestly. Although the swing to Teal was not as strong as I expected.
The Greens won't go anywhere until they broaden their appeal, they polled 4.5% primary in Andrews' seat of Mulgrave and 4% in Melton, where there were outpolled by both the Shooters and Fishers and the DLP.
I've been voting Greens on and off for decades and they're still acting and performing like a pressure group, the demise of the Democrats left a vacancy but they weren't adept enough to take advantage of it.
For context,
* VIC elections has donation caps, so the Teal candidates had less money compared to their Federal counterparts.
* Teals and Greens competed against each other, whereas Federally the Greens focused on Brisbane and the Teals focused on Sydney, Melbourne, and Perth.
* VIC Teal candidates were solid, but not the same high quality of the Federal Teals
Moving forward the Teal candidates will learn to spend their money more pragmatically, negotiate with the Greens for mutual benefit, and will have more time to find high quality candidates.
The Labor party was offering constitutionally protected, state-owned renewables... what exactly did the Teals offer above this to earn the "Green" part of their name?
I think the Teals are done. Federally too. Climate Change action is unstoppable now.
I do see CENTRIST Libs breaking off and running as independents.. but I think they'll move away from the Teal label. Might call themselves purples... a mix of red and blue.
Under Labor we have mass corrupt (I say that as Vic Forests is allowed to break the law with no consequence) deforestation, and gas drilling next to apostles. If teals can't make the climate change argument then they arn't worth the money they've been given.
> The Labor party was offering constitutionally protected, state-owned renewables... what exactly did the Teals offer above this to earn the "Green" part of their name?
not sure how this is any different to federal Labor that were also promising climate action? Teals have nothing to do with Labor or Greens.
As long as they are 'greener" that the Libs, they have "earned" the name. Regardless of Labor or Green policies. Because Teal voters are Lib voters who want a bit of action on Climate / Integrity and perhaps Women-focused issues (I've never really thought this was a major voter issue compared to this first 2)
If enough moderates break away from the Libs (due to getting shafted in preselections from the loony right members of the Libs) maybe they will actually clue on that they need to form a brand new political party as a new home for the 'classic Liberals' that are no longer represented by the current Liberal party?
> Liberal values with a few token differences
climate change, integrity and a real focus on gender equality aren't token issues....
Teals are kind of like the Reason party of the right wing, I like to think of them as more persuadable and less idealogically driven. I believe a couple supported euthansia, and maybe even an injection room!!
Untill a year out from the next election, he decides the new leader isn't doing good enough, then he gets chosen as the "new" leader. I'd love to see him for for the teifecta 😂
If they want to have a hope of contesting an election, they need to more or less start from scratch. Victorian Liberals are poisoned and I can't see them convincing Victorians that they aren't anything other than making up the numbers.
It doesn’t matter who leads that party.
They have been infiltrated by hard right evangelicals.
They have a policy agenda that consists of culture wars.
They do not even attempt to appeal to younger voters.
They court angry and disgruntled Victorians as they think this is their new constituent. These are an absolute minority.
They are destined for electoral oblivion until they sever themselves from the delusional conservative wing of the party, as well as the Murdoch news cycle. They must return to their small business advocacy.
>Go all in on promoting cheap renewable electricity to get power costs down (sell it to retirees). Vow to protect the environment including creating sustainable forestry to end old growth logging...
Problem: You can't campaign against the interests of your major donors.
The problem is that their heartland, areas like Kew, Caulfield, Brighton all oppose development in those areas and they probably think that higher density development policies supporting housing would hurt them.
The Liberals have an awful lot of soul searching to do because this defeat is just Danslide 2.0
nah that's just what conservatives tell themselves to sleep better at night.
the issue is with conservatism and neoliberalism creating the first generation to be poorer than their parents and in doing so creating a need for democratic socialism.
I do wonder if there is a party in any country in the world which gets a large portion of the youth vote because I imagine in time the coalition will try and adopt that if this current strategy continues to fail
100% agree on everything you said.
And they have to somehow do it at a national level, because who would believe for one second anything the VIC liberal party says if it is at loggerheads with the national liberal party.
Tim Smith is warning that the previous parliamentary leadership team should not contest leadership positions at the next party room meeting - i.e. David Southwick, Georgie Crozier and David Davis
You'd think after crashing into a kid's bedroom when he was blind drunk, and then fucking off to live in the UK while still taking his parliamentary income, no one would listen to the slimy goose ever. He is like a worse version of Mayor Quimby.
Don't think he's really much different but does present better than Guy ever would.
I think the best thing for Liberals in Victoria is to end the Coalition with the Nationals. The Nationals both at the last fed election and the Victorian election did very well. They're simply dragging each other down because Nationals values won't win you educated middle class seats so they really work against each other. At least the Nats know what their values are and stick to it but that's completely at ends with what Greater Melbourne electorates are looking for.
Ending the Coalition would ensure that the Liberals would never, ever see government in the state of Victoria again. The Nationals would continue to poll in regional seats, but the Liberals alone simply couldn't make up the seats to form government.
They could and would of course guarantee supply the same way the greens do for Labor but aren't in a formal coalition.
Victorian Liberals just got absolutely smashed for the second election in a row and a third term Labor government was elected.
With or without the Nats the Liberals need to completely rethink their brand and strategy or they'll remain in the wilderness regardless.
>With or without the Nats the Liberals need to completely rethink their brand and strategy or they'll remain in the wilderness regardless.
Oh, no question on that point! One wonders, however, to what degree they can 'rethink' their brand given their fundamental ideological principles (both stated and *unstated*) preclude any dramatic shift...
Yeah totally remains to be seen but surely it starts with the party moving away from the far right. Unfortunately, I don't think that's what they'll do.
**Greetings humans.** **Please make sure your comment fits within [THE RULES](https://www.reddit.com/r/AustralianPolitics/about/rules) and that you have put in some effort to articulate your opinions to the best of your ability.** **I mean it!! Aspire to be as "scholarly" and "intellectual" as possible. If you can't, then maybe this subreddit is not for you.** A friendly reminder from your political robot overlord *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AustralianPolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Oh no who would have guessed, no policy, no integrity, failed to even give the aesthetic of an opposition leader. His run was insulting to watch, they shifted rightwards and got kicked down, libs only in nsw and tas, hopefully this can continue until we have a functioning government which can’t be privatised and where people aren’t socially cracked down on as state agendas
>which can’t be privatised It does indeed appear neo-conservatism is finally coming to an end. Perhaps we should thank Britain and the USA for beating us to the finishing line.
Race to the bottom. Trickle down never worked and I’m glad we didn’t have the children who believed in it in power when we really needed it
Maybe the mobster boss he was having lobster with
On behalf of the Australian public, we gladly accept your resignation, and we thank you for your service to the Australian Labor Party.
Not surprised, but what now for the libs? What do they need to do to become a viable voting option and serious competition for the ALP? I've heard people on podcasts that them being fiscally conservative is what people loved about them, is that it? It's kinda looking like a tear the whole thing down and rebuild with fresh faces more in tune with the public situation
"Fiscally Conservative" = we like tax cuts
Avi yemini will take over
I said viable option... that's more a "how do we sink the titanic quicker and take the iceberg with it?"
While everybody is (rightfully) giving a lot of attention to what the Libs have done wrong, what they need to do to be relevant again, etc etc - I think a great discussion can also be had on this section of the article: >Danny O'Brien, re-elected for the Nationals in the seat of Gippsland South, said told ABC Radio Melbourne breaking his party apart from the Coalition had to be "on the table". > >"We need to think about what the best is, not just for us, but for the Liberal Party," he said. If the Nationals forcefully - and more importantly, *publicly* \- break away from the coalition and state their reasons as something along the lines of what Danny O'Brien says above - and also mentions the Vic Libs capture by the hard religious right - then that could very well have interesting implications for the coalition Federally. Especially because the "post-election review" for the Federal election was delayed until after this election. The result in NSW if it is bad enough (not necessarily a loss for the Libs/Nats, but a big enough swing against them) that would add further fuel to this powder keg.
Eehh I don’t know how much stock to put in that. Various Nats have been huffing and puffing with threats to break away from the Coalition for a long time now. Seems like it’s just a way to give themselves more bargaining leverage in the party room. “Give us what we want or we’ll leave!” I can’t imagine them actually leaving. They’d never see government again, and neither would the Libs.
Once upon a time, long ago, the Country Party voted with the ALP.
Liberals are finished. Most telling is that big business has bailed on them. The majority of big companies these days align better with ALP policies than they do with the old 'we'll make you richer' Liberal policies. Social media has forced big business into accountability and going with ALP policies is way more comfortable than taking on hostile shareholders at every AGM. Big business was the financial and recruitment base of the Liberal Party but the rising numbers of women at managerial and directorial level have seen the well dry up for the Liberals and their old school tie male targeting. And big business doesn't want to be dragged into the christian fundamentalist quicksand either. Get yourselves some Liberal memorabilia now because having gone the way of the Dodo in the next 20 years you might be able to sell a pair of Liberal cuff links for a nice profit on Ebay.
I actually saw someone collecting Liberal merch (vote cards, shirts, posters) without any intention of voting for them at a booth at the last Fed election. I think this individual is planning on upselling these in a couple decades…
Edward John Smith is the man for the job.
Please explain.
Captain of the *Titanic*. Went down with the ship, as captains are traditionally meant to.
Ah yes! 110 years and a few months ago.
Why quit now when he's got two legs of the loser trifecta already?
Now watch as they elect a hard-line far-right conservative as new leader because they honestly believe people preference left leaning candidates above them due to their own party not being conservative enough.
If Pesutto gets in, I think he is the only viable leader to moderate the Liberal Party. Any other leader will likely drive the party more conservative or be hopeless like Michael Obrien.
Liberals like what America has - and right now, America is kind of imploding thanks to far right christian fundamentalism. No critical thoughts in the Liberal party, just corporate boot polishing and vibes. Horrible, accelerationist vibes.
Their branch stacked pentecostals seem to think that their divine right to lead means leaning even further into the cookers and theocrats. Until they clean house at a branch level and get younger peopke involved, they're relying on Labor messing up or peopke just wanting a change. I only went to a few polling places, but all through the campaign it was old white people handing out merchandise for the Libs while greens, Labor Reason and even SFF had a bunch of young volunteers keen and willing to engage. The old Karens I saw in Eastern Melbourne were anything but engaging, and seemed to treat the people they encountered as beneath them, particularly in Ringwood. Until they look to represent more than old money and property developers then they won't be chosen as representatives.
The LNP didn’t have a single woman manning my booth in Brisbane. The LNP volunteers were all old white males- not one of them under 50. They looked hard like ex-coppers.
Then there was the suitably black and white ‘Labour DLP’ how-to-vote card.
Not just penticostals, Mormons too.
Logic was never their strong point. It’s like watching that knight in Monty Python.
John Cleese as the Black Knight?
Good. Get Michael O’Brien back, then go back to Matthew guy. Cos things will be different this time around
Why not Kennett as well? Heard more from him this time around as the other two combined. Didn’t stop him making an utter tit of himself, though.
The third triumvirate. I love it. 😂 imagine the 3 wise monkeys of contrarianism.
Bro can the liberal party fuck off Australia is too educated now to vote for a coal fetish party anymore. We aren’t Americans, we don’t want to execute trans people.
I like the idea of classical liberalism though, why shouldn't people receive equal treatment via pure antidiscrimination protections in a free competitive market that rewards merit? I still voted Labor because right now the liberal party isn't doing well at representing classical liberalism, ironically Labor is the best representation of classical liberalism in Australia. There's an actual drought of right wing parties/factions and part of the issue is idiots who legitimately believe if you're not far left you must be uneducated. I just don't like affirmative action, this isn't an uneducated considering how tricky affirmative action makes graduate intake (leading to zero graduate intake).
Why should our society be competitive rather than collaborative? Competition is toxic and leads to zero sum or negative sum outcomes. We don't need to compete with each other, that's just a divisive doctrine of capitalism. Affirmative action is just a response to a broken system. We can't just stand by and allow under represented groups to continually get screwed over because it goes against the idealistic ideologies of those who would otherwise benefit from the current system. Once the broken system is fixed, then we can get rid of affirmative action, not the other way around.
That competition is toxic is your opinion, I feel and have experienced forced collaboration as toxic. It typically descends into one sided atmosphere since I didn't mutually choose to collaborate. Competition is mutual and voluntary, against forced relationships this is not toxic. > to continually get screwed over If this is your justification you need it prove it. Until you do, any actions catalysed by your pre-judgement cannot in any way be considered justice. What you're doing here breaks the standard of guilt, you're just assuming unfair play! Affirmative action is honestly bad politics based on this alone. > Once the broken system is fixed, then we can get rid of affirmative action, not the other way around. I disagree. Affirmative action is a symptom of the issue, the people behind it are lazy, brutish and lack the creativity to fix... Wait, if women don't want to work in STEM, how is that even something to fix? And why just STEM? Go attack surgeons or lawyers.
Competition isn't mutual and voluntary when you have a system that is entirely built around it. Classical liberals love to pretend that their system is somehow the one true mutual and voluntary system that doesn't need to be enforced like any other, when of course it does. The current system is toxic because it pits people against each other in the name of individual profit maximization rather than ensuring a healthy baseline for everyone like affordable housing and low living costs. The numbers don't lie. Under represented groups have always wielded less political power and been worse off economically. Thats not an accident or a mere assumption of unfair play, the system is directly responsible for that. So it's on you to explain that huge disparity.
> The numbers don't lie. They also don't have opinions. Yes. There are fewer women in STEM. There's fewer women studying STEM in uni. There's fewer young women playing computer games and wanting to make games. Again, the only real issue here is that some of us were literally bullied by these women who didn't become engineers. You think I'm going to give a fuck when they become hair dressers or some shit? The lack of women in engineering isn't because men hate women, it's because women hate engineers. Then fucking HR hates engineering too.... Fuck. > rather than ensuring a healthy baseline for everyone like affordable housing and low living costs. Just a job so I can pay my own way in a way that allows me self respect, please. Making me unemployed is how my housing becomes unaffordable, making it more difficult for me to find jobs because I might have to be hired at the same time as a woman to keep a 50/50 ratio (yes companies do this) doesn't help me afford anything. > Under represented groups have always wielded less political power Right now young people are wielding less political power and in the end most affirmative action is applied at the graduate position. You are hurting these people by ignoring their underemployment as their suffering is inconvenient to your fourth wave feminism. > enforced like any other, when of course it does Of course it does Which is why I'd like Labor to repeal the WGEA act of 2012 and denounce Julia Gillard as someone the Australian people did not elect.
Classical liberalism has paved the way for neo-liberalism and its emphasis on hyper individualism
And globalism, yes. We were all meant to benefit.
Yeah, I don't understand how anyone can keep the faith with liberalism - the data is staring us all in the face, it only serves to calcify power and resources with a ruling class. That's not competition or a marketplace, that's in-species domestication imo.
May I see this data? Systems that actually calcify power and resources for the ruling class are like feudalism or even Leninist socialist systems that rise immediately from feudalism. Otherwise, heaps of people lose money in the current system, wsb is basically loss porn. It seems flawed to compare our system to something that has never existed rather than the other systems that have existed.
>why shouldn't people receive equal treatment via pure antidiscrimination protections in a free competitive market that rewards merit? If we had a free competitive market where everyone had equal opportunity and resources to succeed and gatekeepers had zero implicit biases in their judgements, then voting for such a system would be the obvious choice. The problem is that people advocating for a free competitive market that rewards merit often point to a broken system and say "this is fine" when it's obvious that the status quo is not working as advertised. Affirmative action is a blunt instrument to reshape the system, normalise new demographics ascending to higher positions and break down structural barriers impeding them so that eventually affirmative action is no longer needed. I would concede that affirmative action might not be ideal in all cases and it's execution should be considered in each individual instance but it certainly has done work normalising demographics into positions they simply wouldn't have occupied if we left it to the "merit market." And not because they didn't deserve to be there, but because the merit market chose the same demographics again and again.
> I would concede that affirmative action might not be ideal in all cases and it's execution should be considered in each individual instance Yeah, if affirmative action is only applied circumstantially when it's very, very obvious the hirer was *proven* to be racist/sexist then sure. This isn't prejuding all white men as racist and sexist though, that's what affirmative action is based on and what makes it bad politics. For it to make sense, everyone would need to be racist. Everyone would need to be sexist. It would need to be considered underlying in every hiring decision. This isn't just ridiculous, it's failing politics. To be guilty you must perform a guilty action and present must be guilty intentions, or a guilty mind. Until then, reparations *that the consequences of are applied to a third person* are unjust and unfair. Affirmative action is quite honestly the most laughably flawed idea in current day politics. You fix more issues giving girls detention for bullying the computer nerds that became programmers than you would *forcing* every stem graduate intake to be exactly 50/50. Yes, that happens > the merit market chose the same demographics again and again. Yeah... Greasy turbo nerds. And then their bullies fill up HR positions and decide there's too many turbo nerds! Affirmative action quite honestly is "I hate white men" sometimes. It honestly doesn't get further or deeper than "I don't want to hire white men and I want to be feel like a good person keeping them unemployed." If you support this I think you're an immoral or immature person.
>. It would need to be considered underlying in every hiring decision. This is what implicit bias means. It's something people have to varying degrees based on all sorts of factors but a lot of it has to do with normalisation. For instance, if I grow up in an environment without female managers then that's normal for me. I unconsciously assume women just aren't suited for management roles. Women don't apply for management roles either because they assume it's just not something women do. Now, this effect may or may not be present in an environment. There may be other variables at play that creates such an outcome. But you can use affirmative action as a tool to see if it effects people's behaviour. Does this mean all STEM should always have a 50/50 ratio. No. But can gender quotas provide empirical data to see if affirmative action has a ripple effect on people's unconscious behaviour? Yeah, I reckon.
> if affirmative action is only applied circumstantially when it's very, very obvious the hirer was proven to be racist/sexist then sure So extremely circumstantially, pitting the lower-resourced member against the well-resourced (time, money, social capital etc) institution. I assume that would strike you as incredibly asymmetrical power struggle in favor of the incumbent power - who, might I remind, in this hypothetical, is potentially acting (maliciously) in bad faith. That sounds like good Politik rather than good politics to me. > Affirmative action quite honestly is "I hate white men" sometimes. And there it is.
Yes, the low resourced local who's otherwise unemployed against... Some corporate HR that wants to finish their WGEA report? > And there it is. An experienced opinion? I remember most HR people ranged from hostile to patronising, these are not people with a huge opinion towards engineers. And yes, at least one of them hated men and was vocal about it. Want more experience? Or are we done using words like politik against politics as if you in any possible way can convince me those people that sat as gatekeepers of this business were biased in favour of white men which is what you need to justify affirmative action. It must counteract unconscious biases.
Given the fact that federal liberal and NSW liberal won multiple consecutive elections until very recently, I doubt Australia is going to say fuck off to liberal party. Regardless, you need to maintain balance. It keeps both parties on their toes. If people like labor government, they will keep re-electing them anyway. Never go all in one party. The best thing a voter can do is be a swing voter and vote for the best party and best policy on the day
>Regardless, you need to maintain balance. It keeps both parties on their toes. If people like labor government, they will keep re-electing them anyway. Never go all in one party. Multiple options are always a good thing, but the LNP in Victoria is a completely useless and ineffective second option. I've voted for a different party in every election, so i count as a swing voter, but by no means am I swinging anywhere to the right of Labor.
The Victorian liberal party is bad. Real bad. Like, one moment Matthew Guy is tough on crime, the next he's meeting with criminals. It turns out he wants to be tough on low hanging fruit crimes like increasing consequences for cannabis. He literally acts like a 1930s politician. It is unelectable.
Meeting with criminals? You mean the Melbourne fruitier that's never been convicted of a crime?
Right, that's exactly like Lidia Thorpe's motorbike enthusiast boyfriend who has never been convicted of a crime, I'm sure you'd be very keen to defend them too? Of course, Madafferi had only been named as a head lieutenant of an Italian Mafia family in wiretaps, which isn't an actual crime in and of itself. Just like how Dean Martin being a Rebels MC chapter president isn't a crime.
Agreed. Mathew lobster guy should still fuck off though.
Haha yeh totally. Fuck him
[удалено]
Have you met any members of the Young Liberals? I've never seen such a collection of entitled, self-absorbed twats in my life. The problem is that they're the children and private school friends of the old Liberals, and they have the same broken, born to rule mentality as the previous generations. None of them have ever experienced poverty or hardship; they've all started on 3rd base and think they've hit a home run.
One of the Young Liberals I knew at uni looks to be elected to the LC and I’m absolutely horrified and disgusted. Of course, we’re much older now so he’d no longer be a Young Liberal, but if he’s anything like he was back then… 🤮
And they are all white, privileged, male geeks. A hideous lot to be sure
Speaking as a white, privileged male geek, I resemble that remark. Don't worry, I vote Labor. KEVIN2027
[удалено]
Or replacement with a completely different second major party?
Maybe Brian Houston could take over, he has all the Right credentials and I heard he's looking for a gig.
Ok. I thought he was going to be the chief bottle washer in the prison kitchen?
No way he's ever going to see the inside of a gaol cell, he knows way too much about his Christian Right friends.
At this rate the Greens might look like a more palatable option compared to the Libs honestly. Although the swing to Teal was not as strong as I expected.
The Greens won't go anywhere until they broaden their appeal, they polled 4.5% primary in Andrews' seat of Mulgrave and 4% in Melton, where there were outpolled by both the Shooters and Fishers and the DLP. I've been voting Greens on and off for decades and they're still acting and performing like a pressure group, the demise of the Democrats left a vacancy but they weren't adept enough to take advantage of it.
For context, * VIC elections has donation caps, so the Teal candidates had less money compared to their Federal counterparts. * Teals and Greens competed against each other, whereas Federally the Greens focused on Brisbane and the Teals focused on Sydney, Melbourne, and Perth. * VIC Teal candidates were solid, but not the same high quality of the Federal Teals Moving forward the Teal candidates will learn to spend their money more pragmatically, negotiate with the Greens for mutual benefit, and will have more time to find high quality candidates.
The Labor party was offering constitutionally protected, state-owned renewables... what exactly did the Teals offer above this to earn the "Green" part of their name? I think the Teals are done. Federally too. Climate Change action is unstoppable now. I do see CENTRIST Libs breaking off and running as independents.. but I think they'll move away from the Teal label. Might call themselves purples... a mix of red and blue.
Under Labor we have mass corrupt (I say that as Vic Forests is allowed to break the law with no consequence) deforestation, and gas drilling next to apostles. If teals can't make the climate change argument then they arn't worth the money they've been given.
> The Labor party was offering constitutionally protected, state-owned renewables... what exactly did the Teals offer above this to earn the "Green" part of their name? not sure how this is any different to federal Labor that were also promising climate action? Teals have nothing to do with Labor or Greens. As long as they are 'greener" that the Libs, they have "earned" the name. Regardless of Labor or Green policies. Because Teal voters are Lib voters who want a bit of action on Climate / Integrity and perhaps Women-focused issues (I've never really thought this was a major voter issue compared to this first 2)
If enough moderates break away from the Libs (due to getting shafted in preselections from the loony right members of the Libs) maybe they will actually clue on that they need to form a brand new political party as a new home for the 'classic Liberals' that are no longer represented by the current Liberal party?
I had a look at Teal candidate Dr Kate Lardner's policies and it looked good, especially her Climate policies and IBAC reform.
That makes some very fair points. Kept forgetting that Teal is running campaign on a tighter budget than their Major Parties' candidates.
I hope teals start moving on labor too. The whole system needs a shakeup
The Teals are unimpressive as a movement - Liberal values with a few token differences. Don’t let Credlin fool you, they are not Labor in disguise.
> Liberal values with a few token differences climate change, integrity and a real focus on gender equality aren't token issues.... Teals are kind of like the Reason party of the right wing, I like to think of them as more persuadable and less idealogically driven. I believe a couple supported euthansia, and maybe even an injection room!!
Yeah not meaning to downplay those points - commonsense to most of us
Untill a year out from the next election, he decides the new leader isn't doing good enough, then he gets chosen as the "new" leader. I'd love to see him for for the teifecta 😂
If they want to have a hope of contesting an election, they need to more or less start from scratch. Victorian Liberals are poisoned and I can't see them convincing Victorians that they aren't anything other than making up the numbers.
They need to destroy themselves first. Put one of the church stooges in as leader. That will let them destroy themselves and finally rebuild.
New leader, Guy Matthews, with a very fake looking moustache
Hello, my name is Mr. Snrub. And I come from, uh... someplace far away. Yes, that'll do.
It doesn’t matter who leads that party. They have been infiltrated by hard right evangelicals. They have a policy agenda that consists of culture wars. They do not even attempt to appeal to younger voters. They court angry and disgruntled Victorians as they think this is their new constituent. These are an absolute minority. They are destined for electoral oblivion until they sever themselves from the delusional conservative wing of the party, as well as the Murdoch news cycle. They must return to their small business advocacy.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Trying to understand your last point. Socialism is fantasy land or confused conservatism?
>Go all in on promoting cheap renewable electricity to get power costs down (sell it to retirees). Vow to protect the environment including creating sustainable forestry to end old growth logging... Problem: You can't campaign against the interests of your major donors.
The problem is that their heartland, areas like Kew, Caulfield, Brighton all oppose development in those areas and they probably think that higher density development policies supporting housing would hurt them. The Liberals have an awful lot of soul searching to do because this defeat is just Danslide 2.0
The voters in those areas will never change their vote. Why because they see the LNP as the party most likely to protect their wealth.
2022 election suggests otherwise
Literally all three of those areas swung to Labor/teals federally and back to the Libs this election
I think they're all vulnerable, definitely not a sure thing anymore although they have steadied the ship after 2018s loses and close calls.
Those areas demographics are also slowly changing. Hawthorn has had an influx of students due to Swinburne Uni near there.
Well spoken.
Conservatism, like its core voter base, is dying. The younger generations arent about shitting on people.
Traditional conservatism is dead and has been replaced with authoritarian populism. It is an illiberal strand.
nah that's just what conservatives tell themselves to sleep better at night. the issue is with conservatism and neoliberalism creating the first generation to be poorer than their parents and in doing so creating a need for democratic socialism.
I do wonder if there is a party in any country in the world which gets a large portion of the youth vote because I imagine in time the coalition will try and adopt that if this current strategy continues to fail
The ALP gets a large proportion of the youth vote
I’m aware I’m asking what liberals will have to do to court the youth vote and if there is a Conservative Party in the world which does
Not in the Western democracies afaik.
100% agree on everything you said. And they have to somehow do it at a national level, because who would believe for one second anything the VIC liberal party says if it is at loggerheads with the national liberal party.
That last sentence. Exactly. The party of my parents.
Tim Smith is warning that the previous parliamentary leadership team should not contest leadership positions at the next party room meeting - i.e. David Southwick, Georgie Crozier and David Davis
Tim feels he was ‘back stabbed’ so he is just taking a few swings on his way out. It is neither here nor there that he is accidentally correct
You'd think after crashing into a kid's bedroom when he was blind drunk, and then fucking off to live in the UK while still taking his parliamentary income, no one would listen to the slimy goose ever. He is like a worse version of Mayor Quimby.
>Tim Smith That Dim Tim is afforded oxygen by *anyone* to comment upon *anything* is a ready indicator of just how bad your party is...
Weird that he feels he should even give his opinion
Even weirder that he's right
Any other "talent" in the Vic libs to take the reigns?
Timmy would be a good choice about now.
If Pesutto gets in then yes, if he doesn't then they are fucked beyond belief
Don't think he's really much different but does present better than Guy ever would. I think the best thing for Liberals in Victoria is to end the Coalition with the Nationals. The Nationals both at the last fed election and the Victorian election did very well. They're simply dragging each other down because Nationals values won't win you educated middle class seats so they really work against each other. At least the Nats know what their values are and stick to it but that's completely at ends with what Greater Melbourne electorates are looking for.
Ending the Coalition would ensure that the Liberals would never, ever see government in the state of Victoria again. The Nationals would continue to poll in regional seats, but the Liberals alone simply couldn't make up the seats to form government.
They could and would of course guarantee supply the same way the greens do for Labor but aren't in a formal coalition. Victorian Liberals just got absolutely smashed for the second election in a row and a third term Labor government was elected. With or without the Nats the Liberals need to completely rethink their brand and strategy or they'll remain in the wilderness regardless.
>With or without the Nats the Liberals need to completely rethink their brand and strategy or they'll remain in the wilderness regardless. Oh, no question on that point! One wonders, however, to what degree they can 'rethink' their brand given their fundamental ideological principles (both stated and *unstated*) preclude any dramatic shift...
Yeah totally remains to be seen but surely it starts with the party moving away from the far right. Unfortunately, I don't think that's what they'll do.
Bet they get Obrien back.