By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General - Australian election update - Labor wins the election

Rath said:
Kasz216 said:
 


And i feel comofrtabe with my statement that they are both very right of democrats... and have things that back me up.  People focus on the common things the US doesn't have, and ignore all the uniquely liberal and left things the US has.

Personal freedoms in general are just greater and more protected in the US.


The left-right scale is very much not clear on civil liberties. For example both communists (an extreme of the left) and the fascists (an extreme of the right) supress civil liberties in pursuit of their goals.

In purely economic terms, which is where left-right is more clear, Australia aims for greater equality (more socialism) and America for greater individuality (more capitalism). That puts Australia as a more leftist country than America in my opinion.

 

I think the political compass is bit of a joke personally, it simplifies data too much.

Political government control is on a scale Anarchism(Libertarian) little or no control to Fascism(Authoritarianism) complete control. Civil liberty and freedom comes at a cost of a more Authoritarian government.

Government Economic policy ranges from planned economy Communism on the left wing to a free market economy  Liberalism/neo-liberalism/ordo-liberalism on the right wing. The centre is referred to a social democracy.

Most western world countries are liberal/neo-liberal economies on the right wing. Australia's two main political parties both use liberal/neo-liberal economics but have different approaches in implementing their economic policies. 



Around the Network
Kasz216 said:
FaRmLaNd said:
Kasz216 said:
FaRmLaNd said:

It seems like a pretty good rule that one could use to run a society. Thats why victimless crimes, blasphemy laws or anything in that regard really piss me off.

Yeah, i couldn't agree more.  Though Me... i'd legalize every drug,(regulating some) and suicide... though suicide only after consulting a psychologist or psychiatrist to diagnose sanity.


As for Blasphemy laws.  Luckily they are illegal via constitution.   Looking at it, looks like some states in Australia have blasphemy laws and procedures for people who are offended just by things other people say classifying it as hate speech?

Also there is apparently a Blasphemy law on the books federally, it's just nobody bothers to enforce it... what with the no state religion.

Those laws may exist, but I can't remember any cases that I've heard of where people have been prosecuted over it, though I'm sure its happened. I don't know. I do know that most Australians are pretty irreligious and blasphemy doesn't seem to piss people off that much.

Last federal case looked to be 1919.  So not for a while, couldn't find state refrences though, other then it could be brought up.

Its seems more like a case of things being laws but people stop really prosecuting people over it but don't remove the law. Which of course is very problematic in the long term if Australia were to suddenly become a fascist state or something. Which is why I vote for parties that takes issues in laws like that even existing ;)



numonex said:
Rath said:
Kasz216 said:
 


And i feel comofrtabe with my statement that they are both very right of democrats... and have things that back me up.  People focus on the common things the US doesn't have, and ignore all the uniquely liberal and left things the US has.

Personal freedoms in general are just greater and more protected in the US.


The left-right scale is very much not clear on civil liberties. For example both communists (an extreme of the left) and the fascists (an extreme of the right) supress civil liberties in pursuit of their goals.

In purely economic terms, which is where left-right is more clear, Australia aims for greater equality (more socialism) and America for greater individuality (more capitalism). That puts Australia as a more leftist country than America in my opinion.

 

I think the political compass is bit of a joke personally, it simplifies data too much.

Political government control is on a scale Anarchism(Libertarian) little or no control to Fascism(Authoritarianism) complete control. Civil liberty and freedom comes at a cost of a more Authoritarian government.

Government Economic policy ranges from planned economy Communism on the left wing to a free market economy  Liberalism/neo-liberalism/ordo-liberalism on the right wing. The centre is referred to a social democracy.

Most western world countries are liberal/neo-liberal economies on the right wing. Australia's two main political parties both use liberal/neo-liberal economics but have different approaches in implementing their economic policies. 

Well according to political compass to increase our civil liberties and freedoms as individuals means electing the Greens.  The Greens want to increase income taxes and have a 50% tax bracket, increase corporate tax to 33%, reinstill death duties taxes, introduce family trust funds tax and road congestion tax, eliminate fringe benefit tax, increase tariff's on car imports and tax the mining industry 50%.

Umm...I'd rather have an Internet filter.  



Fumanchu said:
Kasz216 said:
DrStephenTColbert said:

The problem with using political compass is that they don't reveal much at all about their methodology, or the metrics they use to calculate the scores.  Many political scientists tend to view Political Compass as more entertainment than fact.  While I agree that civil liberties are more well entrenched in the US (except for the Patriot Act, of course), I feel comfortable with my statement that both parties in Australia are inherently further left than either American party.


And i feel comofrtabe with my statement that they are both very right of democrats... and have things that back me up.  People focus on the common things the US doesn't have, and ignore all the uniquely liberal and left things the US has.

Personal freedoms in general are just greater and more protected in the US.

If I may, I think the issue we're seeing is assigning an absolute left or right label and applying it to multiple political aspects.  Economics, social welfares, and civil liberties.  So it's better to just list an area and assign a label to that, versus absolutely.  

An excellent point.  As with most things political, we're looking at shades of grey rather than black or white.  A nuanced position is certainly easier to advocate.



Kasz216 said:
DrStephenTColbert said:
numonex said:

The 1950s style Soviet propaganda electioneering is still commonly used in the modern age.The Labor Party are equivalent to America's Centre-left  Democrats. The Republican  conservatives refer to their political opponents as the Communists/Socialist International. 


Not exactly.  Both major Australian parties run to the left of the Democrats in the US.  The American system is inherently more right-wing than the Australian system.  Just compare the social safety nets in the two countries. 

Or you could compare civil liberties... where Austarlia is horribly horribly behind.

People like to call America "right wing of the world" because of the lack of socialzied medicine and welfare... that's a very small piece of the puzzle.  For once... Numonex is right.

Neither major party is remotely as leftwing as the Democrats. 

Compare (as provided by political compass)... Australian Elections

 

VS the US

The positions of Nationals and Labor are mixed up. The Nationals are more Socialist(left wing) than modern Labor. The Nationals want all the subsidies and government assistance to maintain the survival of farming regional towns. Mining is only prevalent in North West of Australia, Northern Territory and North Queensland. SA, VIC and NSW have little or no mining and have to rely on other industries for their economies.

The Nationals are considered more Socialist than the modern Labor Party. The Nationals want all they can get for the bush and be subsidised to maintain the survival of the farming and regional centres. Nationals  want their electorates to be bailed out and kept on life support by the government. 

Both Labor and Liberals have failed to adequately fund the farming regional centres. The Australian outback has been neglected by 30 years of incompetent governments on both sides of politics. Now it is time the bush gets more support and financial assistance to ensure the survival of the Australian outback farming towns. 

Independents now hold the balance of government power and they have won $10 billion in funding for regional Australia. Country projects will now be prioritised ahead of city projects. 

The mining tax was a huge political issue in 2010 and solely lead to the axing of Kevin Rudd because he could not sell the tax and he would not negotiate on the mining tax or even change the tax rate. Julia Gillard was installed in place of Kevin Rudd to kill off the negative vibe from the mining tax which would have seen a Rudd Labor smashed at a Federal election. The appointment of Gillard saved Labor at the election and the mining tax rate was quickly put to bed.

Yes, Labor lost seats to the Coalition and others but they sneaked back into government under Gillard.  Gillard may well be ousted within a year or two and Tony Abbott may well become the next PM in an early election. Gillard and Labor may win back support and increase their hold on government. Nothing is certain in life besides death and taxes.



Around the Network
FaRmLaNd said:
Kasz216 said:
FaRmLaNd said:
Kasz216 said:
FaRmLaNd said:

It seems like a pretty good rule that one could use to run a society. Thats why victimless crimes, blasphemy laws or anything in that regard really piss me off.

Yeah, i couldn't agree more.  Though Me... i'd legalize every drug,(regulating some) and suicide... though suicide only after consulting a psychologist or psychiatrist to diagnose sanity.


As for Blasphemy laws.  Luckily they are illegal via constitution.   Looking at it, looks like some states in Australia have blasphemy laws and procedures for people who are offended just by things other people say classifying it as hate speech?

Also there is apparently a Blasphemy law on the books federally, it's just nobody bothers to enforce it... what with the no state religion.

Those laws may exist, but I can't remember any cases that I've heard of where people have been prosecuted over it, though I'm sure its happened. I don't know. I do know that most Australians are pretty irreligious and blasphemy doesn't seem to piss people off that much.

Last federal case looked to be 1919.  So not for a while, couldn't find state refrences though, other then it could be brought up.

Its seems more like a case of things being laws but people stop really prosecuting people over it but don't remove the law. Which of course is very problematic in the long term if Australia were to suddenly become a fascist state or something. Which is why I vote for parties that takes issues in laws like that even existing ;)


Yeah, couldn't agree more.  We have a similar problem in the US, where things that used to be illegal under the constiution later aren't with no changes being made to the actual document.