Howard's End

 Subtitle: an extinction vortex

-=*=-

I just reviewed the transcript of Liz Jackson's 4C: "Howard's End."

Here are the quick notes that I made:

1. Of some 7000 words, Iraq was not mentioned at all.

2. Moral was mentioned just the once (see next & Howard[1]).

3. Kyoto was mentioned but only by Liz; Costello lied[2].

4. Perhaps the 'best' statement came from Hockey[3].

-=*=-

Ref(s):

[1] JOHN HOWARD: Do we need to lower carbon emissions over time? Of course we do. But to say that climate change is the overwhelming moral challenge for this generation of Australians is misguided at best and misleading at worst...

My comment: If anything, this shows just how far out'a touch Howard was/is. No environment = no future; the 'precautionary principle' says (paraphrased): "Never foul your own nest!" - But that's exactly what burning fossil fuel beyond the planet's ability to absorb the resulting CO2 is all about.

[2] PETER COSTELLO: Well I think people would have listened to what we were doing, which was quite substantive, on climate change if we had have ratified it. By meeting the target, we were meeting what our obligation would have been anyway.

My comment: Again out'a touch but also (effectively) a lie; 'our' Kyoto target was worse than a cop-out, it had been an act of blackmail by the Howard government and AFAIK the target - which was an increase, when all others were to decrease - was exceeded anyway, as the Howard government did as good as nothing (effective) vis-à-vis climate change.

[3] JOE HOCKEY: That was his decision. I suppose I was disappointed, very disappointed that the Prime Minister had always said that he would only stay so long as it was in the best interest of the Liberal Party and whilst his colleagues wanted him. And the formula changed, and he changed the formula.

My comment: it was all "Me, me, me!" from Howard, a party of one, as Bob Wall aptly put it.

-=*=-

Caution: Before anyone thinks to hurl "Howard hater!" register this: the 'hate meme' comes from the right; it is an accusation invented by right-wing think-tanks or the Israel Lobby (as documented by M-W) or both or some other filthy malefactors or all those together. I do not hate people, nor is it a feature of 'the left' to so hate. What I do hate, however (with a mad and purple passion), are the crimes which Howard 'led' our country into, the 'best' (of course, the worst) example being the illegal invasion now turned brutal occupation of Iraq, premised on the eventual theft of most if not all Iraq's oil; aka criminal mass-murder for spoil.

Important comment: the so-called mineral-boom is mainly a swindle; we the people are being robbed blind. Although nominally 'ours,' the great bulk of the income derived from mining is landing in the pockets of the mining entities. In the absence of a strict resource-rent tax (required by equity/justice), the after-tax profit (as fiddled by slimy accountancy practices and such wastage as flying labourers around wholesale), the fat super-profit goes not to we the people, the actual owners of the very ground the bonanza is being ripped from, but to some nebulous shareholders somewhere who may or may not even retain the dough in our wide-brown. Most of the 'good times' of the Howard era came from 'trickle-down' wages, plus 'cheap' imports - not actually cheap, better to say 'less expensive;' with the pollution as well as the jobs having mainly been exported. In a nutshell, the profits from the mineral-boom should be being applied to building infrastructure such as roads and railways for the people; instead we'll be left with nothing much more than yawningly empty holes.

My final comment: The Howard era was 'black,' a smear on our history. The man himself is a swindle; promising once "For all of us" when, like Bob implies, the subtext was always "But only if you're exactly like me, John W. Howard." There was always a sub-text, because that's how Howard lied.

But not 'just' a swindle; he was a shaman and an hypnotist who could make people 'believe,' as (once) did the 'battlers.' But no more; somehow they, the battlers (aka sheople®) twigged. Perhaps the fear of "Serf-Choices" snapped them out'a their TV-induced coma. After that, it was all downhill - into the extinction vortex. It wasn't just the battlers who were caught in Howard's hypnotic headlights, it was the party faithful, and the parliamentarians most of all. They hardly twitched, as they fell after him into his (electoral) grave. As Liz's 4C showed.

Why extinction vortex? Because of Howard's "Me, me, me!" there was no (effective) forward planning. As Menzies planned Holt, say. And, also as the program showed, both with and without Howard, the party faithful and the parliamentarians, as the sheople, saw no future - with the Liberals.

Correctly.