by DAVID FLINT – TALKING about the anti-AUKUS campaign by Labor’s far-Left factional majority, 2GB’s Luke Grant wondered, “Why don’t they just accept that not only the Coalition, but Labor too supported AUKUS?”.
The far-Left expected Prime Minister Albanese to support their cause – being a far-Left leader himself.
But Albanese had learned all the devious skills needed by a successful factional politician when he joined the corps of trainee politicians, disguised as advisers – and introduced by Gough Whitlam.
As paths to preselection, this may well be why so many politicians now fail to do what the constitution prescribes, to make laws for the peace, order and above all good government of the Commonwealth.
When the mainstream media report on politics today, there are at least two considerations.
These are the language used, and whether what is being reported is real or just froth and theatre.
Examples of the latter include most international meetings, parliamentary question time and, since Albanese, Labor Party national conferences.
As to language, this is increasingly inspired by Newspeak, the theory of which is explained in an appendix to Orwell’s novel, 1984.
If anyone doubts this, they should consider why “global warming” was so easily replaced by “climate change”, and why the scientifically accurate word “sex” was equally easily replaced by “gender”.
These were engineered to change the way people think and what they think about. Nothing less. Eventually, the aim is to suppress all thought deemed heretical.
So in addition to the frequent admonition these days, “You can’t say that”, we will be programmed to believe we must not even consider something which goes against the prevailing line.
Once that is automatic, the communist nirvana Marx dreamed of will have been achieved.
This is illustrated in how we are being trained to think about politicians.
Just begin with lifelong hard-Left Anthony Albanese.
From before the election, and during the record honeymoon the mainstream media bestowed on him, the intention seemed to be to ensure he was perceived as so naturally prime ministerial that few even blinked when he constantly flew across the world for a succession of photo opportunities following already decided agreements at the recently revealed cost of $5m.
At the same time, there is a clear agenda of using language to suggest the only acceptable politicians are either in the Labor Party or those Liberals who support Labor policies, such as rushing to turn our cheap and reliable electricity system into something increasingly expensive and unreliable, or allowing men wanting to be women to invade women’s safe places or women’s sports, or to encourage transgenderism among children.
Liberal MPs who support these describe themselves as “moderates” and are usually reported as such. (This column prefers to call them “LINOS” – Liberals in Name Only.)
Other Liberals supporting traditional approaches in these areas are usually reported as “far-Right” or even “extreme-Right”, something most Nationals, as well as One Nation, LibDems, KAP, UAP, Shooters etc, are all assumed to be.
Although extreme-Left, the Greens are usually described as just “Green”.
The result is people, especially those not following politics in detail – probably the majority – are being trained, day after day, to think extremism inhabits the Right and only the Right.
Worse, they are also being trained to believe that what these non-Left politicians espouse is extreme.
In the meantime, the key things Albanese – and the court of supplicants who surround his socialist throne – has learned is if Labor is to continue to be able to introduce its far-Left agenda and if they wish to continue to enjoy the privileges of office, he must not be portrayed by the media as he actually is, hard-Left or even just Left wing.
He must be presented as a skilled moderate as he has been from the election campaign notwithstanding his failure to know fundamental economic facts.
And since there is no chance of dissolving or neutralising the American alliance as Paul Keating and Bob Carr wish, portraying a continuity in foreign affairs between the Coalition and Labor is a wise line to push.
The submarines are years off, with the obstacle that nuclear power, the use of which here does not enrich Beijing, is still not allowed.
As to the monarchy, Albanese knows there was always only one outside chance of replacing it with a politicians’ republic.
He knows that what Graham Richardson said long ago is true, that if “the” republic is not dead and buried, it is certainly comatose.
That’s why the issue was pushed off the conference agenda to a fringe event. There will be no second republic referendum for the foreseeable future, not even in the reign of George VII.
So while the hard-Left seemed to dominate the ALP national conference, that was just theatre.
The truth is the conference is now as much a guided democracy as Sukarno’s Indonesia famously was.
Never again will a leader be photographed, standing under a lamplight in the cold, as Calwell and Whitlam were in 1963, waiting for the “faceless men” to hand down their ruling on a major decision concerning the American alliance.
Most realise that what is important is to keep Labor in power to advance a socialist agenda and allow those in the inner circle to make a difference, especially an upward difference to their income, privileges and wealth.
If the price is to accept nuclear submarines in some distant future, Labor will pay that.
So unsurprisingly, prominent opponents were not there, and Albanese was able to triumph without humiliating the recalcitrant.
All will be rewarded both in terms of socialist policies advanced and personal benefits enjoyed by a new ruling class which now extends to the managerial elite who have marched through the corporate boards.
Albanese’s next problem will be when the referendum results are declared. Will he accuse Peter Dutton of breaking the heart of the nation?PC