Is the Western world Sleepwalking into a Totalitarian Nightmare.
In today's post, I want to look at a bit of history to see if we can draw any parallels in what is happening in politics especially within Australia today.
In the early 20th Century, after World War 1, the world was plunged into a massive economic crisis (The Great Depression) that laid the seeds and eventually gave birth to the Totalitarian Regimes that gave rise to Nazi Germany, Stalin Russia and Fascist Italy. But in this lets just look at Nazi Germany as its an area I'm most accustomed with.
The Versailles Treaty signed at the end of WW1 was something that basically crippled the Germans. Germany was basically held fully accountable for the entirety of WW1 and were forced to pay Reparations. Couple this with the Stock Market crash of 1929 the Wiemar Republic basically lost control of the hearts and minds of the German People who were never able to recover to their Pre-WW1 glory.
With the feelings of Ill-Will in the German hearts, a strong and outspoken National Socialist Party were able to storm onto the scene to encourage and fuel the resentment to the people whom they blamed for their current condition. The National Socialists pointed the finger of blame well and truly at the Jewish population as they appeared to be living decent lives, they had money and businesses etc.
As the country was so down trodden by their years of misery, the general public were quickly brainwashed into also resenting the Jews. But as sectors of the society spoke out, the National Socialists unleashed their Brown Shirt Brigades to maintain a high level of fear and intimidation. People that spoke against the Nazi's were beaten and abused and often killed.
Hitler himself was not originally the leader of the Nazi's he was only an ordinary member and had failed to gain any political traction for many years. The Nazi's didn't storm to power via a violent military coup or assault on government. Rather The Nazi's stood for general elections in the 1920's and early 1930's. Once they were elected by the German People there was a shift in power from the usual German political parties until such time that the Nazi's actually held the balance of power and Adolf Hitler was actually put into the position of Chancellor.
The rest as we can say is history.
So there are 3 things needed for a Totalitarian State. 1) a Supreme leader who holds unrestricted power, 2) the use of violence and intimidation to maintain power and 3) The removal of Political Freedoms and free thinking.
So lets look at Australia. Here in the wonderful country which has been racked with turmoil on governments since the turn of the century we have lacked any real political leadership. But all of the decisions from all of the major political parties have been moving more and more to the Left side of the political spectrum.
The writing is on the wall for a Totalitarian Overthrow within Australia.
The left wing politics have ingrained themselves so deep within all of our political and social institutions that we can already see the erosion of our political freedoms and well as our lose of Free Speech and Free Thinking. This was evident during the debacle of the Same Sex Marriage votes. The believers in conservative values were screamed down as being homophobes and bigots and intolerant. There were innocent people sacked from their jobs because of their personal beliefs. The same is seen when we debate Climate Change, people are ridiculed and abused for their own personal beliefs.
Then we have the Trade Unions, which in some instances are paramilitary organisations. In the current QLD Elections, the Trade Unions are out in force vandalizing election material, slandering and telling blatant lies regarding opponents. In some instances, the union members go as far as abusing and screaming at the elderly volunteers of the opposing parties. This is all in an attempt to return a left leaning party to power. As we mentioned in point 2 above, this is using violence and intimidation to maintain power.
The only thing that Australia does not have is a single ruler. We do have people that COULD take that position if all of the heavens aligned, but funnily enough any potential person in this category is from the complete other end of the spectrum and are very much Right Wing politicians. People such as Pauline Hanson play identity politics perfectly. They find the issues that are enraging the population and foster that hatred and use it to their advantage to start winning legitimate seats in parliaments throughout the nations, all of which are controlled by the one figure head.
So in conclusion, I don't think Australia is sleeping walking into 1 totalitarian nightmare, I believe we are walking into 2 of them that are going to do battle for control the Australian public in years to come. We will see a greater rise in Far Right and Far Left politicians that get peoples support and they will eventually white ant the traditional Australian parliament until one of them take full control.
With this in mind, the voting public need to be aware that their vote is useful. Donkey votes and electing minor parties can do major damage. Saying "Oh screw it I'll just vote Greens or One Nation" can eventually lead to disastrous consequences. If we look at Malcolm Roberts, he was elected to the Australian Senate with only 150 Votes and the same can be said about many of the other smaller parties. The only way to combat this really is to eliminate compulsory voting and preferences, but that's the subject of a future post.
I see the problem, not only here in Australia, but across the so-called 'free world' is the left-right paradigm itself. Politicians of all persuasions know this. A politician on the left can therefore rely on at least half the voting public to support them in all their ideas and political decisions (no matter how crazy or detrimental) and to forgive them for any sins they may commit (either personally, in business or in power). Likewise, a politician on the right can expect the same leniency from those who support their side. When an otherwise normal, rational person identifies with a particular side of the left-right political spectrum, they will make irrational judgements based on supporting their team. "Gotta support the team man". I have witnessed this so many times. In fact, I have been guilty of it myself for most of my adult life ... until I came to realise that in a so-called democracy, you get to pick your team, but you must play the game.
If I go to my local MP for whom I voted, and request that we stop bombing people in Iraq and Syria, or that we need to defend our privacy and rights (what remain of them), or that parents should have the right to choose whether they vaccinate their children, what will be achieved?
Nothing.
Does my vote therefore count?
Does that MP deserve my endorsement and validation by my ticking a box next to their name on a ballott paper?
No.
Sorry for the rant, but I am completely disillusioned with our political process. A choice between tweedle dum and tweedle dee is no choice at all.
Peace.
I can be rational about politics. I see that there are unseen forces feeding the polarity. Divide and conquer. It even sets the sexes against each other, as if there should be sides in something that works best in unity. I am not cynical about politics. Imagine living in a country where you couldn't vote at all? Or you were downtrodden by foreign rulers, and denied basic rights? I champion democracy, even if it is imperfect. I support unions because without them there'd be no 8 hour day, or five day working week, four weeks annual leave, or sick pay, etc. Great discussion :) Happy Steeming... what I'd really like is the replacement of Centrelink with a UBI....and get rid of one layer of Government at the same time, or streamline it....with blockchain technology, it could be done. Health and Education could go to the Feds; then State Governments and Local Governments could be amalgamated, somewhat?? With a population of ONLY 24 million, do we need five States and two Territories? Could be all one. Then the savings get churned into the UBI :))
I guess I was making assumptions, but it's what I've generally noticed, including in myself. Yes, the divide and conquer strategy is being used and they are ramping it up. It's not easy having a rational discussion nowadays (especially on social media like FB and Twitter which is why I'm dropping out of those platforms (and the censorship)). And the mainstream media is stocking the fires like never before.
I've been following the war in Syria very closely over the past few years and have listened to countless hours of conversations and testimony from real Syrians, both in Syria and those living abroad. That war was clearly instigated, funded and clandestinely fought by some of our leading democratic states, namely the US, UK, France, Canada (initially) and Australia has also tagged along for the ride (the RAAF was involved in bombing and killing over 80 SAA soldiers, allowing ISIS to make a counter offensive in Deir Ezzor).
The Syrian people were, according to the propaganda of these democratic governments, being downtrodden by their evil, unelected leader, Bashar Al Assad. Were there civil rights abuses in Syria? Yes, but no more than in other acceptable regimes like KSA, Bahrain, Kuwait, and the US itself. Of all the Syrians I have read and listened to over the years, all support their leader (despite having many gripes as we do with our governments). The country, despite years of war, still provides free healthcare, free education, including free university, and housing and full rights for hundreds of thousands of Palastinian refugees. I guess what I'm saying here is that democracy does not work equally well in all countries. I've heard various academics and commentators from the Middle East who insist that western notions of democracy will simply not work in some countries, particularly those where tribal and family ties are still very much honoured.
But, when Syria did hold elections for president and the make up of the government (elections that were deemed free and fair by the UN, and, despite being in the middle of a war, had the same voter turnout that got Trudeau elected in Canada), the western democracies (and news media) completely ignored the results (ie the will of the people).
I definitely agree with you that we have too many layers of government in Australia. I see small government, on a more local level as the best solution, and more democratic option. Of course, there is no easy solution. In another post, I stated that I see democracy is being set up to fail in the near future (think Trump, Brexit), and that we will eventually be ushered into a new technocratic, global government. This has been planned for a long time, the only way I see to defeat that, is greater decentralisation.
Apologies for the longwinded response :-)
Cheers
No apologies necessary. I enjoyed reading your post. I deplore the demonising of refugees in Australia. It is hypocritical, to say the least, especially when we are bombing Syria, as you point out. I believe in democracy, but sure, it's not easily applied, or workable, in some countries. I was speaking from a purely western view. I wasn't saying it should be imposed or universally applied. I was merely expressing my support for democracy here, in Australia, and stating that it can't be taken for granted. I grew up in Ireland, where we, as a nation, were ruled by a foreign ruler for centuries. It's much more congenial to have one's freedom. It can't be overlooked how precious it is, or how hard-fought it may have been to secure. I am grateful to wake up in a country of blue skies, sunshine and prosperity. Happy Steeming :)
Yeah, I should be grateful, I know. I really have nothing to complain about, but I've just become so disillusioned with our governments (western governments) over the way they have destroyed countries like Iraq, Syria, Libya and now Yemen.
I don't know what the answer is, but I just don't think it's what we have now. Increasing government secrecy, increasing forfeiture of our civil rights, increasing propaganda, increasing surveillance all because of the so-called "terror threat". A threat created by western governments themselves going back to the British creating the Muslim Brotherhood in the 1930s, and later the CIA creating the Afghan mujihideen which would later morph into Al qaeda and ISIS.
I am optimistic in that I believe more and more people are seeing through the lies that are being fed to us on a daily basis. Change is coming, I hope it will be for the better. I think it eventually will. That's why Im here on Steemit.
Peace.
You are feeling global responsibility. You need more Zen :-) Sometimes people in war-torn countries are having more love than people who think they are missing out and only suffering :-) Can be lonely in Western World. Yes, I understand about the CIA creating future enemies. It could make a person cynical. Eyes wide open. I often think we live in a police state here in Australia, and our Government is becoming the enemy of its people :-) but that thought doesn't make me feel very happy. Remember double demerit points at their maximum a few years ago? The NRMA and RACQ surveyed its members and lobbied Governments to reduce the number of demerit points each offence carried. It's a simple way to see that, the more cameras installed, the more offenders that are caught; just as, the more laws that are introduced, the more normally law-abiding citizens become law-breakers. Simple. Scary. Be vigilant. Yes, we need to protect our rights.
LOL. I do need more zen. That's why I'm chilling out watching Paul Kelly live at the Opera House ;-)
Jelly :-) Enjoy..
Australian values are being dictated by a right-wing press, controlled by the octogenarian oligarch, Rupert Murdoch, through Newscorp. I feel, if anything, that Australia has moved to the right, and has been doing so since the 1980s. The union movement benefits the people, and although they don't see it that way, also businesses by ensuring that people have enough money to spend on items beyond the essential. The reason that governments have been"in turmoil" as you put it is because the major parties are very close in the polls, and require only a 3% swing in electoral support to win or lose an election. Therefore, smaller parties have been able to carry the balance of power, when neither party or party coalition has been able to obtain a majority. I find it interesting that they tend to favour Labor over the Liberal-National Coalition. They are unaffiliated, but exercise their logic and what is best for the people. If they could have worked with the Lib-Nat Coalition, they would have. (Word on the street was the Lib-Nat Coalition was too arrogant and not open to compromise, whereas Labor was more willing to adapt its policies.) The best politician this country ever had was Paul Keating, and the press hated him. It was the economic policies of Paul Keating that laid the groundwork for John Howard's period of prosperity. He introduced compulsory superannuation, amongst other things. But discussion is good. Happy Steeming :)
Thanks for your reply.
Sadly I really don't beleive Newscorp as as much sway as it once used to have, 10years ago I would agree with that comment 100%.
Australia is most certainly swinging to the Left not the Right as can be seen with many of the recent Lib-Nat policies being labelled Labor-Lite.
But I do agree with you on the small margins, but I honestly think this is more because of the Senate rather than the House of Reps. If the Senate wasn't looking to push their own agenda rather than just do their job, much bolder and broader policies that would affect the nation would have been passed. Instead we have party lines that run through the Senate.
I beleive that much of the original Abbott/Hockey Budget was very good reform, but it was all blocked because of party lines. Not because of the best interest of the nation.
Also, you are correct, credit where credit is due Keating was an excellent PM and laid very good solid groundwork for the Howard Government to improve on. Sadly its just been economic vandalism since then with too many NO men standing in the way of any kind of reform. Opposition parties forget that they have also been elected to improve the standards of their constituents and to support the government.
Sorry I think I went way off topic there.
It's interesting seeing things outside a bubble. From other feeds I exist in, Labor is often referred to a Liberal-Lite, and we're 'definitely swinging right'. It wasn't until I was on here that I saw people mentioning the Liberals being Labor-lite, which I also think is reflective of how close the polls are, and how many of their policies are so very similar (or just blatantly stolen and slightly adapted from the others...)
I wish when I was younger I understood just how good Keating was.
He was vilified in the press, when really, he was amazing ! Maybe because the press took him down is why Labor hates to stick its neck out and follow its conviction?
Yes, her really was. How anyone reads the press as 'pro-Labor' I'm not sure, but I do know that they exist.
How true ;-) our press in particular is very pro-business and anti little-person-on-the-street. Not too many media outlets not owned by Murdoch. He was instrumental in getting Trump elected, too, LOL :-)
You didn't go off topic at all :) I enjoyed the read. But I do still think the press is quite rightwing. The Tele is subsidised, so remains. MSN news is all Murdoch. It's meant to blind the masses. And the Government is stymied because its majority is so slim. But maybe that's a good thing? Except they're not achieving anything. Without workers a country can't function. Keep the workers happy, I say :)
Let’s just make and keep workers in general. Make working rewarding for the people and welfare unliveable and the ENTIRE country will prosper.
I’d love to see major and revolutionary tax reform that basically incentivises hard work. Would only work if we could cut out the hoards of people with their hands out looking for free money.
Welfare is a necessary evil and I'd prefer if people got welfare than have to see kids living rough on the street. If that happened, I'd be one of the do-gooders who went out and gave them a home. I prefer them to have welfare because I wouldn't sleep at night, knowing there were thousands of cold, hungry kids without a roof over their heads. So I support welfare. But a UBI, payable to everyone would be fantastic. You could still work on top, but the awful paper passing jobs that support current welfare system would go....the paper-passing part would pass to the blockchain....
There was a trial on the UBI in Europe last year I beleive. I'm pretty sure they found it to be a complete failure as i didn't encourage anyone to work so less people did work and more people just slipped between the cracks.
It's been operating quite successfully in Norway for some time. Now, I'm going to do a study on it :-) Happy Steeming and just, BTW, due to having suffered the devastation of Cyclone Debbie, I haven't "worked" since. I've been supporting myself, trading crypto :) so I've found another means of income, while I oversaw the repairs to my place. They are now complete, and I'm loathe to return to my previous employment, from which I took extended leave. I like working for myself, and I must say, I've worked extremely long hours, and when I wake up, the first thing I check is the state of the markets....and I dream about them in my sleep. So I'm easing off now, been driving myself too hard. I think there is a high possibility that robots will take over an enormous amount of jobs previously done by people. At the moment, Wall Street is being run by bot-traders. When it all falls apart, there will be hell to pay :)) Happy Steeming, and I look forward to the introduction of a UBI :) I think life should be less stressful and more about family.
I disagree with the final point you make quite strongly. We don't need to make more people more disengaged with politics. That's exactly how you get the government doing whatever they want. Having compulsory voting and preferential voting is the best part of our system. Just the way the senate uses that, and abuses that thanks to party preferential voting (above the line) hurts it just to make the process of voting simpler. It would be better to limit the number of candidates on the senate ballot somehow.
We do need (more) reforms to how the senate voting is done though, ideally I'd be wanting to get rid of the above the line voting completely, and expanding the allowable 'incomplete ballot fill' to be as incomplete as you want. Number 1 box, 4, 15, or all of them. When you're preferences are exhausted, you're ballot no longer goes towards electing anyone. If enough votes exhaust too early to elect a full selection, that should be a pretty big indicator that the voting public aren't happy with the options provided.
I'd also much rather the damage of the far left than the far right, but as you kind of allude to, either extreme isn't that desirable.
As for erosion of our freedom of speech, come look at what was happening to the people on the other side of the aisle. They weren't just getting screamed at and called names. Bricks through windows that were aimed at the person. Death threats. Assaults. And constantly wondering about their safety. But never mind all that, some of them were calling us names.
Well, sorry, but if that tiny little bit makes you feel bad, maybe it might make you think about what those on the other side have endured publicly in the last few months of a farce, and what they have mostly endured privately all their lives.
If our freedoms have been eroded so much, what can't you do now that you could do last week, month, year, that doesn't impact on the freedoms of other Australians?
The biggest Freedom that Australia is loosing at the moment is the freedom to hold a differing opinion.
I see it as the Far Left taking the freedom as way, but you are right to say that the Far Right can do the same thing, they certainly aren't innocent in it.
The Civility in society has disappeared. The lack of respect for differeing opinions seems to not exist any more. Personally I respect everyones opinions, and I'm fully aware that not everyone will agree with everything I say.
But you are completely correct about the Senate, it doesn't work properly. The Senate is a house of review, it is not designed to hold an opinion or sway policy.
How? You can still hold an opinion, lets say (because it's current), that same sex marriage is wrong. But that doesn't mean our secular government should restrict the freedom of those that think it's right from being able to actually get married.
It hasn't changed the freedom of those that think it's wrong. Just stopped them enforcing their views on others.
Of course you can hold an opinion, but your not allowed to express it.
I should equivocally state, I have nothing against SSM. Have a major problem with the lack of bill that was voted on though.
But I digress.
So now, under the new laws to be passed a catholic priest will not be FORCED to do something that he doesn't want to do for Religious beliefs.
But a devoutly Catholic or Muslim etc Photographer will be FORCED to take photos at a SSM service for fear of prosecution.
So they aren't allowed, by laws to be passed, to express a different opinion. We're not talking about vilifying anyone, or attacking or protesting. Rather a person saying "I'm terribly sorry, but in my religious beliefs I can't be a part of this, I wish you all the best" again I'm not talking about someone turning around saying "Fuck off Queer" or anything like that as that's hate speech and a different issue all together.
So its an Opinion that members of the public are not legally allowed to express.
You've got a couple of things in here.
Firstly, Priest, or other religious leader. They operate as part of a recognised religious organisation, and as such are able to use the already existing religious exemptions laws, that allow them to do things like fire someone from a Catholic school just because of their sexual orientation. It's not considered discrimination or unfair dismissal, because they're a religious organisation, and key to a distinction, a non-profit religious organisation.
Secondly, A member of the public however, operating a business, is not covered by religious freedom to discriminate, and hasn't been previously either. They operate a business, and are required (with some exceptions under things like the liquor licensing act) to provide their service without discrimination based on things in the anti-discrimination act, which includes sexual discrimination, and has done for many years. Basically, you have to treat people equally, even if you don't believe that people are equal (which is a pretty shitty attitude). I'd imagine if the polite "I'm terribly sorry, but my religious beliefs prohibit me supporting this" was the regular reaction we wouldn't have needed the laws that we have, but unfortunately like with many things, a minority of ass hats spoil it for everyone. Since I'd imagine, unless intending to stir up trouble, a SSM couple that are politely told that when trying to find a photographer would look elsewhere. All the cases I've seen of trouble happening for denying service (overseas obviously since we haven't got it yet) have been for places agreeing to provide a service, and then at the last minute denying service. Which regardless of your views is a pretty horrible thing to do, and done with pretty obvious intent to ruin someone else's happiness. You've got to be a pretty sad individual to be that petty.
Now, an interesting test case would be if the church was providing the photographer as part of the service, at which point I'd imagine that it would be much the same as the issue with the priest, and unlikely to have the priest (and the building...) agree to host the wedding, but their photographer not, so unlikely to get to that point unless intentionally by the church just to cause trouble...
Swap out for past things, like when we recognised that indigenous Australians were people, or (probably a better example) when inter-racial marriage became legal, or the anti-segregation movement in the US.
Freedom of speech also doesn't come with the requirement to be given a podium to express it, or the requirement of anyone listening to it.
The biggest and most significant point there. The Arse Hats fuck it up for everyone.
Maybe we just need to scrap all of this and create an Arse Hat Law, banning all assholes and dick moves. That would fix everyones problems.
!originalworks
The @OriginalWorks bot has determined this post by @gohba.handcrafts to be original material and upvoted(1.5%) it!
To call @OriginalWorks, simply reply to any post with @originalworks or !originalworks in your message!
This post has received a 0.52 % upvote from @drotto thanks to: @gohba.handcrafts.
Congratulations! This post has been upvoted from the communal account, @minnowsupport, by Gohba from the Minnow Support Project. It's a witness project run by aggroed, ausbitbank, teamsteem, theprophet0, someguy123, neoxian, followbtcnews/crimsonclad, and netuoso. The goal is to help Steemit grow by supporting Minnows and creating a social network. Please find us in the Peace, Abundance, and Liberty Network (PALnet) Discord Channel. It's a completely public and open space to all members of the Steemit community who voluntarily choose to be there.
Unfortunately I see the US heading in a similar direction and hope myself nor my son live long enough to see it happen.