There We Go, Again...

At 4:27 local Australian time, this the BBC World News Finance (Update as of 17:23 GMT):

"Stock markets down on Greek swap fears.
"Stock markets have declined sharply on concerns ahead of a key deadline to secure Greece's future in the euro."

Dow Jones -176.38 (-1.36%)
FTSE 100   -44.75 (-1.52%)
Dax       -233.35 (-3.40%)
Cac 40    -124.98 (-3.58%)

See here

Money Politics.

Abraham Lincoln [A]

So now Aussie blogs are talking about "money politics - American style" (h/t HnH)

Bronte Capital:

"Indeed American style money politics in Australia is far more insidious than in the US because our billionaires are far less diverse. A diversity in billionaires (and in the way they make their money) gives us a diversity of billionaire opinion." (See here)

Don't get me wrong, I think I get the idea: if billionaire A pushed public opinion and the government in the direction her vested interests pointed; well, perhaps then billionaire B could push public opinion and the government in the opposite direction.

Say, in the US the Koch brothers push towards lower taxes for the wealthy, Warren Buffett, who appears to be a nice guy, pushes for higher taxes.

Some kind of balance, I suppose: one billionaire, one vote. Nice billionaire B against not-so-nice billionaire A.

That might be better than a situation where not-so-nice-guy billionaire A pushes unopposed. So, I guess there is some clever political thinking there, if it were applied in the Australian scenario.

But there is something I don't quite understand: wasn't Australia supposed to be a democracy? You know, one person, one vote, no matter how much money, skin color, gender, religion. The regime Abe Lincoln (precisely from the US) speaking at Gettysburg, once supposedly described as being "of the people, by the people, for the people".

Gettysburg Address. Hay copy [B]

Are we ready to give that up?

Image Credit:
[A] Abraham Lincoln. Wikipedia.
[B] Hay Copy of the Gettysburg Address. Wikipedia.

Vested Interests vs Class Warfare (II).

I knew Wayne Swan's article had a tail...

The first sign the wheels were in motion came today real early.

Liberal frontbencher Joe Hockey, who must have spent a good part of his weekend laboriously writing, published an op-ed at the SMH titled "Politics of Division will Kill Ambition". Notice the cleverly crafted "politics of division", avoiding the charge that he is using the "politics of envy" American Tea Party cliché. (See here)

By about 10:00 am (local time) Fairfax Media SMH Online was abuzz with comments to Peter Martin's and Julie Robotham's "Mining Magnates Hit Back at Swan" (229 comments by 12:08 pm).

Martin and Robotham:

"Mining barons Clive Palmer and Andrew Forrest have taken on the Treasurer, Wayne Swan, the first labelling him an 'intellectual pygmy' who does not understand economics and the second launching a national advertising campaign against him." (Emphasis added. See here)

Readers will recognize the devilish subtlety in this approach. I mean, replying to Swan's accusations ("The combination of [mining] industry deep pockets, conservative political support, biased editorial policy and shock-jock ranting has been mobilised in an attempt to protect vested interest") by launching a national media campaign… It takes sheer genius.

----------

Clive Palmer did not lag far behind. Earlier in the morning, Palmer (who coincidentally was awarded the title of National Living Treasure (!) last weekend) in declarations to ABC, slammed Swan as an "incompetent" who does not know how the economy works:

" 'Really he knows that, if the public doesn't know it, he knows he doesn't know how it works,' he said." (See here)

But coincidences were far from over. As Hockey, Palmer also decided to publish a piece at the SMH Online. In that piece, a clearly hurt Palmer claims Swan doesn't know him. The piece was published with the title "Wayne Swan Knows Nothing about Me, or our Democracy". (See here)

For some strange reason, I was reminded of the popular Kelly Clarkson song:

----------

From Hockey's piece:

"Australia runs as a meritocracy. We earn rewards based on merit and effort".

I don't know the readers, but I suspect subtlety, intelligence or plain common sense are not among the merits of our elite. And I have difficulty visualising the kind of effort worth the billions these people own.

Perhaps I am biased, but to me, it sounds like a complex mix of arrogance, greed and folly.

And yet, we let these people own the country, run Parliament and decide for us. Who's really at fault here?

Vested Interests vs Class Warfare

Entry ticket for movie theatre in Berchtesgaden [A]

Politics in Australia is great fun, full of ironies, and way cheaper than a movie ticket.

Don't believe me? Let me give you a sample:

The week started with Kevin Rudd's failed bid to dethrone fellow Labor PM Julia Gillard, who back in 2010 dethroned him. At the time, big miners in Oz were on the warpath, due to the new Rudd mining rent tax. Gillard dethroned Rudd to appease said miners. I've recently reminded readers of this.

Rudd went to the backbench exile and, lo and behold, Federal Treasurer, Wayne Swan (Labor) two days ago (March, 1) published an essay in high-brow publication The Monthly: "The 0.01 Per Cent: The Rising Influence of Vested Interests in Australia".

Readers are encouraged to read the essay, but the title sums it up reasonably well.

In any case, it states many things obvious to those following local developments. So obvious, in fact, that even your humble correspondent has already mentioned many of them!

After illustrating with the US example how a minority hijacked and thwarted an otherwise reasonable capitalism (!?) into serving their own interests, Swan warns that:

"The combination of [mining] industry deep pockets, conservative political support, biased editorial policy and shock-jock ranting has been mobilised in an attempt to protect vested interest. It's reflected in how the Coalition under Tony Abbott has recently radicalised itself into an Australian version of the Tea Party (...)
"What characterises the vested interests that I'm concerned about is how they misrepresent their self-interest as the national interest. There has been a perceptible shift in this country in recent years, and it is sadly very much in the American direction of stronger and stronger influence being wielded by a smaller and smaller minority of vested interests."

Can't say I disagree. Of course, you don't expect Swan to acknowledge the ministry he's a part of exemplifies the inordinate level of influence those vested interests exert, do you?

But that's not the end of the irony! Not by a long shot.

After clarifying that "it was not for him to defend some of the richest people in the country", opposition leader Tony Abbott, self-proclaimed champion of Aussie battlers, jumped to the defense of some of the richest people in the country:

" 'But they [big miners Gina Rinehart, Clive Palmer and Andrew "Twiggy" Forrest] are wealth creators. Wayne Swan is a wealth waster,' Mr Abbott told reporters in Sydney.
" 'They create jobs, they create investment, they create prosperity for the families of Australia'." (Emphasis added. See here)

Liberal frontbencher Christopher Pyne:

" 'Labor always falls back on class warfare and the politics of envy when they have nothing left in the cupboard to talk about of any substance,' he told ABC Radio today.
"Mr Pyne rejected suggestions Australia was a less fair nation than it was 20-30 years ago, and that the gap between rich and poor is widening.
" 'I think Australia is very much the country it has always been,' he said." (Emphasis added. See here)

Overseas readers, particularly American readers, would immediately recognize such conservative clichés like "job-creators", "politics of envy" and "class warfare", used shamelessly by Aussie politicians.

Undoubtedly local "right-of-centre" fans, never guilty of the sin of being perceptive, will not sense the irony here. So, it falls upon yours truly to spell it out: Pyne and Abbott are conceding Swan's point: "the Coalition under Tony Abbott has recently radicalised itself into an Australian version of the Tea Party", to the point of using the same clichés.

For once summarizing things accurately (maybe because the text was included unedited from its originator, AAP), News Ltd publications Sun Herald and The Australian described the situation like this: "The opposition has dismissed Treasurer Wayne Swan's attack on vested interests as a form of class warfare". (See here and here)

Yes, indeed, it's class warfare when one neoliberal Labor politician denounces rich people's vested interests.

It ain't no class warfare when two neoliberal Coalition politicians support rich people's vested interests. Let alone when "the vested interests that I'm concerned about (...) misrepresent their self-interest as the national interest". Imagine you called that "politics of greed"!

Now you see why Aussie politics is great fun.

PS,
But I'll be fair: that's your chance to do something well, Swan. We all know what they say: talk is cheap. Back your fighting words with combative deeds.

PS2,
I'll leave Pyne's spectacularly wrongheaded remark on unchanging inequality in Oz for another day. I've gotta find another job, as I lost one of my 2 part-times, thank you very much.

Looking at things on the bright side, I've got more time to expose bullshit and somehow I feel remarkably motivated to give back some of the shit I am taking.

Image Credits:
[A] Eintrittskarte, Berchtesgadener Kurkino. Wikipedia.