I watched this weeks ABC TV Q&A last night and Good Grief! I was actually feeling sorry for Peter Hitchins. I do understand his moving from radical Trotskyist to radical conservative. Indeed, as he said, he grew up and it is a natural progression for an ideologue who wants to see an imposed social order. I share some of his concerns about the loss of public behaviour protocols, social stability, and sometimes wonder if we have paid too high a price for this individual freedom. In a weird way, and Hitchins and Brand would be equally horrified at this, I reckon he is more like Russell Brand than anyone would think. Did I hear all your jaws collectively hitting the floor? ;-)) Why do I say this? Because they both yearn for a more collective social unity, one that looks beyond our precious individuality to the mutual good. Where they differ is that Brands collective consciousness is a voluntary, evolutionary movement, whereas Hitchens is a regressive imposition of failed social mores that bred millennia of hypocrisy and masked existential misery. And I occasionally disagreed with Germaine Greer. This is not so unusual. I could have some lovely arguments with her, because she too understands the difference between fighting and arguing. I particularly disagreed with her assertion that Labor lost the election because it was a shambles, which I saw as buying into the Murdoch-LNP spin. As I reiterate, seemingly to no avail, Both the Rudd and Gillard governments were remarkably effective in doing what good governments do: passing good legislation and steering the unwieldy Ship of State through rough waters. And the roughest of those waters were the Abbott-Murdoch-Mining rampage of cant and caterwauling.
Posted on: Tue, 05 Nov 2013 20:40:19 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015