Iain Hall's SANDPIT

Home » AGW and climate change » Greens policies, a secret agenda that is anti-free trade, anti-capitalism, anti-wealth, anti-consumption and anti-growth.

Greens policies, a secret agenda that is anti-free trade, anti-capitalism, anti-wealth, anti-consumption and anti-growth.

Well it seems that I am not the only person to like what Kevin Andrews has to say about those nasty Greens because Janet Albrechtsen has a high opinion of his analysis of the Greens as well:

Janet Albrechtsen

“Unless we understand the ideological foundations of the Greens, we will fail to effectively address the challenge of their revolution . . . What the Greens present is the cutting edge of a clash within Western civilisation itself,” Andrews said. By looking closely at Greens policies, he has uncovered what he calls the new coercive utopianism.

It becomes clear that behind every stated purpose – and an increasing number of anodyne motherhood statements – set out in Greens policies through the years is a secret agenda that, at its core, is anti-free trade, anti-capitalism, anti-wealth, anti-consumption and anti-growth.

The Greens’ latest bill to stop banks raising interest rates beyond the Reserve Bank’s official cash rate is just the latest example. It fits the Greens’ agenda to reduce the flow of credit in an effort to reduce consumption. Drawing on the Greens de facto think tank, the Australia Institute, new Greens member Adam Bandt wants us to work less, too, presumably so we earn less money and consume less material goods.

For too long, Greens extremism has been hidden from the Australian public under a cuddly shroud of green goodwill.

As success brings more scrutiny, the Greens may well go the way of earlier “new forces” in Australian politics. But just as the Greens would be foolish to take their continuing success for granted, we would be unwise to treat their demise as a given.

 

Hmm I bet that a certain rather desperate minion of that party (who is nonetheless rather tardy about paying his party dues) will be writing a piece denouncing Janet’s opinion as a ” Green smear” at a Totally Toxic website.That said I think that the Greens certainly need to have their true agendas exposed and denounced at every opportunity so that care and concern for the environment can be reclaimed by those of us who don’t have a Marxist agenda and a misanthropic desire to destroy the future for humanity.
Cheers Comrades

 

 


22 Comments

  1. […] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Greg Naylor, Iain Hall. Iain Hall said: Greens policies, a secret agenda that is anti-free trade, anti-capitalism, anti-wealth, anti-consumption and anti-gr… http://wp.me/p1ZH5-2qy […]

  2. Eric Sykes says:

    “anti-free trade, anti-capitalism, anti-wealth, anti-consumption and anti-growth”…well yes, of course, what’s so secret about it? that’s why some people vote for ’em, that’s why in a representative democracy they are there, representing those opinions…”big secret agenda” not!…what is it with the right and conspiracy theories?

  3. Iain Hall says:

    Yes Eric but it is also precisely why some people who vote for them because they think the greens are a touchy feely environmental party would change their minds if they thought about it more deeply 😉

  4. Ray Dixon says:

    Iain, as much as I dislike Albrechsten and dismiss her as a right-wing version of an appartchik, I have to say that Eric misses the point entirely here.

    The anti-progress and anti-establishment ethos that go to the heart of *some* of the Greens’ agenda is what will actually keep them from ever becoming more than a fringe party.

    So what if *some* of the 10 or 12% of people who they have attracted to support them agree with this retrograde stance? It’s always been the case that there are small number of fringe radicals who want to bring the system down and all that’s happened is the Greens have given them a new base to call home.

    It’s a real pity that a party that started out as being only about protecting the environment (a most worthy cause) has manifested itself into such a hate group, which is what they are rapidly becoming. “All you need is love”? They wouldn’t know the meaning of it.

  5. Iain Hall says:

    Ray

    The anti-progress and anti-establishment ethos that go to the heart of *some* of the Greens’ agenda is what will actually keep them from ever becoming more than a fringe party.

    Which is something that those who are concerned about the policies of the Greens (like Moi) have been making very clear of late.

  6. Ray Dixon says:

    As I’ve said before, Iain, there are radical nutjobs on both sides of the political spectrum. Your side had OneNation (for a while). Next you’ll have the TeaParty. We’ve got the Greens over here on the left of centre – and most of us don’t like them because they’re just too far on the left. To the extent that they’re actually more about anarchy in some quarters, as Eric inadvertently confirmed.

  7. Eric Sykes says:

    “they think the greens are a touchy feely environmental party would change their minds if they thought about it more deeply” what absolute rubbish. as if they’ve actually “hidden” something, all of their polices are open and clear to all..far more open and available than is usual in Australian politics. It is the social progression in their overall focus that has actually got them in…

    And Ray, the “anti-progress and anti-establishment ethos” you are on about is exactly, the very reason, the absolute reason the green “agenda” will over time move from the fringes to the centre….if that involves bob brown or the current middle class wilderness porn freaks or anyone else in the current party is not the point…it is THE AGENDA (hidden apparently to the right, open, obvious and available to everyone else) that will actually win the day. A simple move away from the failed strategies of individual greed and competition as the primary drivers of human existance. It is not rocket science.

    What is it with the right and missing the obvious?

  8. Ray Dixon says:

    Eric, it’s not just “the right” that doesn’t fully understand the Greens’ agenda. It might be “obvious and available to everyone else” but so are the taxation laws – do you fully understand those? I don’t and nor do most people because it’s too bloody boring to read through them and/or to think about.

    That’s sort of what we’ve got here. You see it as an inevitable shift to a new society but that’s only because the Greens have crept up on what is basically an apathetic public. Don’t delude yourself though, the public are predominantly a very conservative lot (even on the left, which btw depends on where you put ‘the centre’) and they’ll just stomp the Greens out the moment they start to get too far ahead of themselves.

    As. Sure. As. Night. Follows. Day.

  9. Eric Sykes says:

    In your dreams Ray….in your dreams. The notion that “people are basically conservative” is a nice romantic right wing notion. It has no basis in fact whatsoever.

    Enuff from me.

  10. Ray Dixon says:

    The notion that “people are basically conservative” is a nice romantic right wing notion. It has no basis in fact whatsoever.

    It has a long, historical basis in fact. It’s called elections, which by and large see over 80% of people vote for one conservative party (the coalition) or the other conservative party (the ALP).

  11. Eric Sykes says:

    Well Ray that assumes that elections have anything whatsover to do with what people actually think and feel; and further if the options presented to them have any actual meaning for them at all. Thus the shift towards THE AGENDA has been progressively growing since the turn of the century. You can play King Canute on tha beach all you want. But the actual evidence is clear – social change is rarely if ever introduced by elections or by governments. Again, not rocket science, just history.

    What is it with the right and history?

  12. Ray Dixon says:

    Eric, just so you understand, I’m not part of “the right”. Unless you regard anyone to the right of the Greens as being on “the right”.

    I’ll be honest and frank with you here, Eric : You’re talking in riddles mate. Where are your facts – you know like statistics etc – to back up your rhetoric that THE (Greens) AGENDA is growing and the ‘revolution’ is coming?

    No disrespect meant, but this sounds like some evangelist preaching ‘the end is nigh’ or, dare I say, some maniacal 60’s hippy guru like Dr Timothy Leary.

    Please, we’ve done the ‘let’s throw out the establishment’ bit decades ago and it didn’t happen … because we grew up and realised it ain’t that bad and, hey, we even became part of it.

  13. Eric Sykes says:

    ‘let’s throw out the establishment’ bit decades ago and it didn’t happen……

    …sigh. What is it with the right (who claim they aren’t) and history?

  14. Eric Sykes says:

    also try this…just for a bit of a reality check.

    http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/11/17/3068933.htm?section=justin

  15. Iain Hall says:

    That is a great example of a rather misleading story if you ask me Eric.
    Firstly there is no link to a source for the claim and secondly I suspect that the rankings are based on the fallacious “per capita” measurement and thirdly I suspect that our emission’s are calculated to include all of the coal that we export but do not in fact burn ourselves which I think is dodgy accounting.
    In all it does not provide any kind of “reality check” at all.

  16. Ray Dixon says:

    Eric, my mistake. I thought you wanted a serious – semi serious would do – debate on the Greens agenda. But all you can do is trot out rhetoric, give links to someone else’s words and label me a “rightard”. I’m sorry you wasted my time.

  17. Eric Sykes says:

    Well Ray forgive me, I have read your posts here, and at PP over time, and there’s nothing in what you have said that would lead me to believe you are anything other than right of centre (wherever the centre happens to be this week). “Rightard” is not a word I have ever used; in fact I am not entirely sure that it is actually a word.
    As for “evidence” well….there is so much of it, that the fact you’ve missed or ignore it says a lot really 😉 and it’s not my role to be your research assistant.

    Btw/ the only thing you have presented yourself as “evidence” of the essential conservatism of (Australian) citizens would seem to be….election results?….which really, don’t offer much in terms of structural analysis of the steady progress of ideas (agendas), over many years (100s of years Ray) in regards to social justice, human rights or environmental concerns and the process of framing public policies that reflect those concerns, across the world.

    Once again: the basis of this little side show is that the Greens are “hiding something”. In my view that is a ridiculous assertion. They are quite clear on all their policies however horrific those policies may be to News Corp. Scaremongering Ray, is a well known propaganda tool of the right…for 100s of years….a very effective tool, citizens will do a lot of stuff that is actually not in their best interest if they are frightened…the health debate in the US might be one more recent example of the absolute effectiveness of generating fear through propaganda about something that is actually in a nations long term best interest.

    I, for one, and I am clearly not alone, think that having the Greens extend their influence, progressively, over time, in a representative democracy, will (history teaches us) lead to ideas that are currently considered horrific moving towards consensus…like say…errrr….votes for women (shock horror)..an end to the slave trade….an end to segregation…..the overturning of child labour…all of which were attacked and propagandised about by the right, and yet…surprise suprise….people in some countries decided they were a reasonable idea anyway, and they forced their Parliaments (through community action, organised protest, direct action and shouting and generally not being nice meek little consumers who should do what they are told, and, yes Ray, even voting) to act.

    So again the idea that the Greens are “hiding” a postmoderncommunistlattesippingchardonnay swillingeliteacademiclivingontheironlungofgovernmentfundsgayunderminingourwayoflife agenda is just…silly. That agenda is absolutely clear the Greens are a postmoderncommunistlattesippingchardonnay swillingeliteacademiclivingontheironlungofgovernmentfundsgayunderminingourwayoflife party and therefore are openly “anti-free trade, anti-capitalism, anti-wealth, anti-consumption and anti-growth”.

    Fantastic, should be more of it.

  18. Ray Dixon says:

    Wow Eric. So many words, so little substance. Should I bother replying? Briefly then:

    1. You couldn’t have read much of me if you still regard me as being “on the right” of political thinking in this country. Did it ever occur to you that many people who overall are on the left also hold conservative views on *some* issues? Anyway regardless of where you put the centre I am not what most people generally term a ‘right winger’.

    2. I was referring to your lack of substance to back up your sweeping claims about the ascendancy and great future of the Greens. It’s not my job to find proof of that for you. If you want to come into a debate and make claims like you did expect to be challenged.

    3. Now as for the ‘evidence’ you point at givemeabreak, that’s just more general rhetoric. And you’re romancing history here. And stealing it. Just because we’ve socially & politically progressed over the years does not then automatically mean the natural progression is towards the political party that calls itself the Greens. Most of those reforms (all of them really) came about under conservative governments and sprang from conservative people. You and the Greens don’t get the kudos for that by osmosis. It’s like the Greens claiming they are bringing about gay rights when in fact gay rights were won by hard working & dedicated gay people (many of whom were also conservative) working co-operatively, respectfully and quietly with conservative, traditional governments like the coalition and the ALP. Same goes for womens’ rights, abortion, recognition of aborigines, stamping out racism. You are claiming something as a victory for the Greens and/or Greens thinking when they weren’t even a participant!

    I think I’ve wasted enough of my time addressing your hype, Eric. You don’t seem to understand that mankind is progressive regardless of any political leanings.

  19. Eric Sykes says:

    “mankind is progressive regardless of any political leanings……”

    sigh.

  20. Eric Sykes says:

    no..er but…no..er ” the public are predominantly a very conservative lot …

    sigh.

  21. Ray Dixon says:

    I feel like I’m debating a recording.

  22. Ray Dixon says:

    I think Eric is confusing people having conservative views on certain issues with being an out & out ‘Conservative’. Most people areconservative on a whole range issues especially when it comes to matters economic – which is the Greens great achilles heel.

Comments are closed.

Welcome to the Sandpit

I love a good argument so please leave a comment

Please support the Sandpit

Please support the Sandpit

Do you feel lucky?

Do you feel lucky?

%d bloggers like this: