Archives: Letters to the Editor

What or who in our history would have Australians up on their feet cheering. I offer Matthew Flinders and his circumnavigation of Australia as that event and that man.

He was the first man to circumnavigate Australia, with a special, separate circumnavigation of Tasmania, together with his colleague George Bass, thrown in for good measure. He was the first to refer to the continent, previously known as Terra Australis, as Australia, and to lobby vigorously with the British Admiralty for its formal adoption as the name of this continent.

Importantly he had two indigenous men, Bungaree and Nanbaree, willingly join him on the circumnavigation of Australia. Nanbaree changed his mind when they reached the Cumberland Islands. However, Bungaree continued to complete the circumnavigation. This journey records the first circumnavigation of Australia by a British man AND an Indigenous man. That should be notable in its own right.

Flinders also put foot on every state, and the Northern Territory. So, his voyage can be justly celebrated by all states, not just the first colony, NSW.
There are dozens of dates in that voyage that would make a more worthy National Day then 26 January. Just pick one.

John Small writes that he “voted Teal 1, Albo 2, not because I wanted the Teal candidate to be elected but because I support stronger environmental and conservation policies than those of the government.”

Surely that objective would be best served by voting Green? Maybe that’s what Mr Small did, and voted for Hannah Thomas, unless he was of the view that David Bradbury counted as a “teal.” The only other candidates were Liberal, One Nation and “Trumpet of Patriots.”

Dennis Altman deludes himself if he thinks that, except for a few far right activists, Australians reject the idea of a White Australia. No one should doubt that if, instead of the current 4 per cent, First Nations people numbered 50 per cent of our population, roughly the percentage of Palestinians in Palestine/Israel, they would demand the return of their homeland as vigorously as Palestinian do theirs.

In that event, we white settler Australians would show ourselves to be every bit as brutal as Israelis are. We’ve done it before and we’d do it again if we thought that our backs were against the wall. Our vastly superior numbers allow us to ride on our moral high horse but the reality is that when settler Australians look at Israelis we are looking at ourselves.

An excellent article displaying the far greater subtlety of the Chinese culture than the obtuse and aggressive one inherited from the warring tribes or Europe. It highlights the propensity of the West both to view its governance model as “the end of history” and its similarly self centred view that all of humanity will be the same as them: devious, exploitative and power hungry. They treat the extraordinarily different historical, political, economic and cultural development of other civilisations as being of lesser value than ours as the pinnacle of human achievement. A brief and even cursory look at our blood-soaked and richly flawed history should have been sufficient to dispel and such presumptions.

Since 1978 China has adopted the five principles of peaceful co-existence espoused by China, India and Myanmar as long ago as 1954. These derive much of their origins from Confucianism. They are mutual non-aggression, mutual non-interference in each others internal affairs, equality and mutual benefit, peaceful co-existence and equality and mutual benefit.

The west, on the other hand, continues to look into a mirror when assessing the motives of others, and continue to see themselves reflected! Hence the decline of the west and the rise of China!

“Arguing that an emphasis on moral leadership could become an excuse for weak legal institutions and, in turn, corruption”

All this while this while as we speak the loss of freedoms we once had in Australia are being challenged in the courts on behalf of migrants who fled oppression to a country once known for its freedom and fair play. Then there is the USA proving to have the most corrupt courts system in the western world openly discussing is lifetime appointments of justices by biased Presidents tolerated until a exceptionally bad President comes along.

Americans’ belief in their exceptionalism is deeply grounded in their culture. As a boy I loved American movies where the main character overcame great odds to win. This theme continued being depicted in western movies and action movies whether decimating foreigners, terrorist or aliens from space. I have not watched these for years turned off by the constant propaganda that might is right, regardless of laws. What triggered my dislike is the constant presence of the American flag in scene after scene. The flag appears on mastheads, on walls, on desks, on shoulder flashes, on badges – every one impressing the viewer that this flag, and only this flag, represent the solution to the world’s evil. Australian politicians need to stop venerating that flag and stand for the values of the electors in Australia. Our connections with the American military (esp AUKUS) needs to change. We need Plan B!

David Solomon’s article doesn’t mention the possibility of a different kind of tactical voting by Labor voters. I’m a lifelong ALP supporter living in Grayndler, the PM’s ultra-safe electorate, and I voted Teal 1, Albo 2, not because I wanted the Teal candidate to be elected but because I support stronger environmental and conservation policies than those of the government.

A good article. We certainly need to pay attention to what other Middle Power nations are saying and doing. We could all do with watching Mark Carney’s speech more than once and letting its truths sink in. But what about Australia’s elephant in the room? Pine Gap and other military establishments under the control of a foreign power? Canada apparently has no US military bases and very few military personnel stationed there. How many active military personnel are based in Australia? Non-alignment will always be impossible while foreign powers control strategic infrastructure or operate out of our country.

I note with approval Ramzy Baroud’s article. It seems we have serious truth or translation problems. Take the Hebrew phrase describing events over the weekend “Yisral harga od 31 bani adam be’eza.” An Israeli government translation would be “Israel continues to maintain the ceasefire in Gaza.” But the translation outside Israel (unless maybe it was being processed by Trump’s White House) would be “Israel kills another 31 people in Gaza.”

Anthony Albanese is a 20 year survivor in politics. He has learned to alter his opinions to suit the political environment. He gained the chalice cup as PM and wants to retain it. He covers his actions in secret cabinet meetings and controls what is disclosed to the public. He is afraid of voter opposition. He must diffuse critics. He wants the voters to be passive recipients of his legislation.

So he legislates hate speech laws to give him the power to disrupt free speech that might cause him upset. (Rather Trumpian?) So if I stand on the roadside when a foreign president drives past, and hold a sign that states “You Are Not Welcome In This Country”, would I be charged under that legislation? What if I held the sign above my head and shook it forcibly? Would that be intimidation?

The PM is no statesman and is turning away from his voting base. Remember at the last election more that 60 per cent of voters did not give the ALP their first preference. Voters won’t remain passive if this legislation is actually enacted by policing forces!

Back in the 1950s, the wool industry provided wealth for the nation. It employed shearers and stockmen and other farm workers to build shearing shed s and fence lines. And the property owners paid taxes. Then synthetics became in vogue and the wool industry crashed. We built factories and built cars then removed tariffs and they crashed. We discovered iron ore, gas and coal and they provided funds for governments while avoiding to pay taxes.

In a generation or two that extraction racket will collapse as countries respond to climate change. What will replace them? Who is making plans for that future? Yes we are attempting to address climate change though with persistent opposition. Yes we will (maybe) get a nuclear submarine to employ a few sailors. We may have a fast train from Newcastle/Sydney/Canberra! But who is exploring the possibilities of the future and who will become its agents?

Australia should sign up to Canada’s third way trading block which has 1.5 billion people. At the same time withdraw from AUKUS and never sign up to the Board of Peace. But I doubt Albanese has the courage and leadership skills to do so.

Profound thanks are in order. This is an inspiring article. Simple truth so often is. And the question, Could you imagine the Nakba being taught in our schools?

That Jepke Goudsmit’s hauntingly beautiful Lament is not included as a preamble to our new hate speech laws is an opportunity missed.
Pearls and Irritations, you are a beacon on our media horizon.

The Combatting Antisemitism, Hate and Extremism laws establish a highly politicised administrative process for declaring “Prohibited Hate Groups” without judicial oversight. Organisations which advocate engaging in conduct constituting a hate crime, including hate crime conduct engaged in outside Australia, may be declared a Prohibited Hate Group

Offences of directing, recruiting for, funding or even supporting such a group carry 7-10 year prison sentences.

A UN Commission of Inquiry (COI) found Israel has committed acts that amount to genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes in Gaza.
Major Australian Jewish organisations like the Executive Council of Australian Jewry actively advocate for and support Israeli government actions in Gaza. Under the new law’s own definition, these groups qualify for declaration as Prohibited Hate Groups.

Equally, some Australian pro-Palestinian groups which have justified Hamas’s 7 October action as lawful resistance. The COI found the action included war crimes. These groups would also qualify to be declared Prohibited Hate Groups.

Any attempt to use these new powers to suppress public discourse will prove the laws are not genuine tools for social cohesion, but targeted instruments of oppression, exposing their true political purpose.

Peter Sainsbury’s overview of Australia’s climate risk in the decade since the Paris Agreement is timely and helpful. The obvious question, however, is how Australia’s response compares with that of similar countries.

Our decarbonisation record is mixed. Australia leads the world in rooftop solar uptake, and some states have achieved exceptionally high shares of renewable electricity. Nationally, emissions targets of net zero by 2050 and a stronger 2035 goal are now legislated. Yet compared with our OECD and G20 peers, Australia still ranks among the highest for per-capita emissions, remains heavily dependent on coal and gas, and lacks a national carbon price.

Instead, we rely on the Safeguard Mechanism, which allows major emitters to continue polluting by purchasing offsets rather than making real cuts. Despite clear advice from the International Energy Agency, new coal and gas projects continue to be approved. While renewable electricity is growing rapidly, renewables still account for a relatively small share of total energy use.

Australia is making progress, but it is not leading. Greater urgency, ambition and policy consistency are urgently needed from the Albanese government.

This was the most confronting article by Julian Cribb I have read, and there have been a few. Clive Hamilton once wrote of his “Oh Shit” moment with regards to climate change. I had mine in Vietnam last year travelling around the vast Mekong delta, a massive rice-growing area, when I found it was only 84cm above current sea-level, but seas are expected to rise by that amount or more before the end of the century. There are huge implications for food security and displacement of people.

In this context, US President Trump’s systematic dismantling of the Inflation Reduction Act which was funding the necessary transition away from fossil fuels, and more recently the taking over of the Venezuelan oil fields are particularly egregious acts. In a spectacular display of short sightedness, Trump wants to keep the US economy running on oil, coal and gas. It is difficult to know whether he is ignorant of the climate consequences. He must have been aware of the LA wildfires of 12 months ago. Recently the World Weather Attribution report indicated that human-caused climate change increased the likelihood of the wildfires by about 35 per cent. Is there no-one to advise Trump of such things?

Nowhere in the press has it been made explicit: Kevin Rudd was sent to Washington, precisely because he is the leading expert on the US-China relationship. 40 years’ experience on China, including as a professional diplomat, with a doctorate from Oxford on Xi Jingping’s worldview, isn’t coincidental. It points directly to why he was chosen to represent Australia to the United States at a time where they still claimed to respect the rules-based international order. His status as a ‘Labor mate’ was a nice bonus for his posting, not the rationale.

Yes, Trump’s new worldview makes that all irrelevant – but why deny Dr Rudd’s experience, simply painting him as another ‘Labor mate’? If anything, pointing out Rudd’s inability to do the job he was sent to do, given his experience, emphasises how far Trump has taken the US in the direction he has – the central point of the article. Yet, the assumption we’re left to draw is that Rudd was there as “a Les Patterson-type figure” on “one last trot of the diplomatic circuit”, and that we must only “now send a professional diplomat.”

The political pile-on is tired, lazy and, one would have thought, below Professor Curran.

The IHRA definition of antisemitism will cause a lot of angst for those offering opinions to and then the conclusions of the Royal Commission.
Opinions offered to the Royal Commission will be judged in accordance with levels of education and understanding of the histories of Zionism, Israel, Palestine, Balfour Declaration, Sykes-Picot Agreement, different religious perspectives together with the actions of the Israeli Parliament, the Likud Party and the Israeli IDF and settlers whose primary objective, a Palestine free of ALL Palestinians, and any action carried out by them to achieve this objective is acceptable, no matter how inhumane or ethically unacceptable.

Kenneth Stern, the lead drafter of this IHRA definition has confirmed that this definition was not designed to be used as the definition of antisemitism. It was originally purposed as a non-legally binding tool for researchers and data collectors specifically the European Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia.

Stern opposed its use in ways that might undermine academic freedom or stifle political speech and has opposed its use in ways that might undermine academic freedom or stifle political speech.

PM Albanese was correct in giving himself time to give full consideration to the value of a Royal Commission.

Eugene Doyle is on the money with the outing of Manichean thinking. But why is it so prevalent and so unchallenged? “Born Bad” by James Boyce traces the influence of Manicheanism on Augustine and so on the western world via the notion of Original Sin. Augustine won the theological politics of the day over Pelagius. A win for a conservative, controlling church and the rest is a western world history believing as a matter of faith that “all descendants of Adam must be regarded as being of a ‘perverted’ or ‘depraved’ nature”. Boyce traces this corrosive, destructive doctrine throughout western history and exposes the enormous damage it has done. and continues to do.

Conservative controllers love the simple goodies and baddies split. If you can create a civil war inside the individual you weaken the person. Then you offer them a faith based dogmatic way out.

Congratulations to Mark Carney for his stirring Davos speech. It’s difficult to disagree with anything he said but, as frequently occurs with me, it’s what isn’t said that causes me problems.

Carney talks repeatedly about ‘great powers’ (US and China presumably, Russia is hardly a great power at present) and ‘middle powers’, the rest of the wealthy, western, capitalist regime, I assume; the ones that have to greater and lesser degrees benefited from the structures and processes of the system of international relations established since world war two.

There is not a single mention by Carney of the third world, the developing world, the lower and lower-middle income countries, the supposedly post-colonial nations, the Global South, whatever you call the countries that don’t fall neatly into Carney’s dualist approach.

Carney’s bugle call would sound more sincere and more realistic if he also called on the ‘middle powers’ to work closely with ‘the rest’ to ensure that their difficulties, grievances, aspirations and proposed ways forward were integrated into whatever it is that Carney and his ‘middle power’ colleagues are considering.

More emphasis on global equity and justice wouldn’t come amiss. Forget the window sign, Mark, open the shop to more people.

Thank you Greg Barns. This Rowland law was passed with utter contempt for the parliamentary committee system which is there to allow public input. She was asked three times on ABC TV to elaborate and obfuscated. Only a handful of the reported 7000 submissions were published by the PJCIS. Although all federal legislation is supposed to pass through a human rights filter, not this time it seems. Both the IGIS and the HRC made submissions, yet I don’t believe their views were actioned; still, I have asked them. S.114.4A (5) is bad law as they and I pointed out in our submissions. There is also that part with no place in Australian law which does away with procedural fairness (eg, audi alterem partem, give a ratio decidendi).

It seems the Greens, Liberals, Nationals and Teals were unable to withstand the steamroller and ensure proper consideration of the bill.

While U.S. citizens and the rest of the world were speculating about how Donald Trump would circumvent the U.S. constitution which unequivocally denies him a third Presidential term, Donald Trump was cobbling together the “Board of Peace” with himself named in its constitution as chairman for life (or until he resigns). He has enlisted 30 countries to the Board of Peace.

Trump has expressly eschewed International Law and disregards United Nations resolutions and principles with alacrity.

It seems plain to me that this is Trump’s move to retain power as emperor of a US empire with the support of the Republican Party and a Republican US President his lackey.

The other comment that could be made about both Eastwood and Wayne is that their impressive domination of the violent western style film industry could well be seen as re-enforcing the gun culture that now takes 50,000 Americans mostly children, every year. Promoting a violent male approach to masculinity may well be the source of US dysfunction today. Just a thought!!

Climate scientists have sounded the alarm for decades, yet some still choose to ignore, the danger. Former Deputy Director of the NSW Emergency Service and member of Emergency Leaders for Climate Action, Chas Keys notes that there is even resistance to the “catastrophic” fire danger warning introduced after the devastating 2009 Black Saturday fires.

Those warnings were pushed by the emergency leaders who fought those fires. Many were shocked at the ferocity and behaviour of fires in recent years. They understood the risk, recognised the influence of a changing climate, and chose language carefully to cut through scepticism and apathy. The goal was simple: to save lives.

So why does climate scepticism persist? Increasingly, it is amplified through social media and fuelled by vested fossil fuel interests. The World Economic Forum’s 2025 Global Risks Report lists misinformation and disinformation among the top five immediate global risks.

A recent viral example is the so-called World Climate Declaration, signed by more than 1100 “scientists and professionals”. The vast majority lack climate science expertise, while its backer CLINTEL has documented links to fossil fuel interests. The climate crisis is real; the doubt is manufactured.

Before the 1990s, Australia had neither an obesity nor a diabetes problem. That should prompt the concerned to ask what changed? Maybe our food regulators have been asleep at the wheel, maybe there there is more high processed and junk food available today.

But how does anybody know if they don’t consider just how much sugar and other questionable foods we ate back then? We definitely didn’t go to the gym every day.

Obesity is also a side-effect of antidepressants and psychotropics, which Australia also consumes phenomenal numbers of. Why, exactly? It is also a stress reaction. Why would anybody be stressed in the lucky country? And people eat the foods they can afford.

So in the middle of a much longer cost of living crisis, now spanning more than 20 years and linked to wage stagnation, wage theft, underpaid contract employment even in professions, inadequate welfare support, and one of the highest, artificially constructed household debt levels in the world, just what do we expect people to eat? Instead of just attacking the most visible target, why aren’t we asking harder questions?

Chris Minns repeatedly accused protesters of chanting “globalise the intifada”. A woman said on television that protesters chant “gas the Jews”. I have attended the Palestine Action Group’s protests dozens of times, and I have never chanted “globalise the intifada” (or heaven forbid, “gas the Jews”), or heard anyone else chant them.

The most I ever heard of “globalise the intifada” came from the lips of the Premier, who has greatly succeeded in popularising it.

Anyone attending these rallies will find that protesters are mostly seniors, families with prams and small children, nurses, Jews, teachers, union members, students, etc. They are friendly, ordinary people we would be happy to have as our neighbours. These rallies are well-managed by the PAG’s own experienced volunteer marshals. There have been over 100 such protests, including the 300,000-strong march across the Harbour Bridge, and they have invariably been peaceful, orderly, and without any notable incidents.

Our democracy, free speech and protest rights cannot be sacrificed on the altar of false accusations, pandering journalism and an inhumane political agenda. We do not (yet) live in a Trumpian dystopia where lies are true, and marching for humanity somehow black-magically caused a massacre.

It’s good that James Curren’s advice is “in the aether” as Government and its Prime Minister ponder a replacement in Washington. But what he writes about the US change suggests that the Prime Minister is now in an extremely awkward position. I refer to Trump’s “invitation” to him (and to the NZ PM as well) to be part of the delusionary “riviera” Peace Team for Gaza.

No, it might just be worthwhile for the Australian Government and our PM not to bother too much about a Washington replacement at this time. Let it be a low priority task that can be considered later on, maybe next year … An appointment right away would need to be an extraordinary person who was capable of defending the Government’s support for a decision from the Socceroos to threaten withdrawal from the FIFA world cup later this year, and thereby joining the threatened boycott of the tournament that will go ahead if FIFA President Gianni Infantino doesn’t cancel the FIFA peace prize to the war monger who is occupying the White House.

Nous sommes le Groenland.

It seems only fair – I have asked the government of Palestine through its embassy to extend an invitation to our vice head of state, Sam Mostyn, to visit Palestine.

The Palestinians living in Gaza have been subjected to a two-year military assault on men, women and children, denial of food (starvation), denial of basic medical care, insufficient water supply, inadequate emergency shelter to replace the destroyed buildings, and a relentless barrage of excuses attempting to justify these crimes. (I cannot be party to silencing writers, P&I 15 Jan)

To say these things is not antisemitic. It is simply pointing out the glaringly obvious. It is impossible in our connected world to livestream genocide and pretend it’s not happening. Free speech is one of the pillars supporting our Australian social contract. It is far more important than the claimed comfort of 0.4 per cent of Australian citizens.

One revelation emerging from the fog of obfuscation shrouding events in Gaza and in Israel more generally is the undeniable reach of Zionism. Its ability to infiltrate and then influence decisions taken by those operating within the corridors of power is second to none. But those operating within those corridors depend ultimately on public approval. They are losing that approval. The crimes are too blatant, too public to pretend otherwise. Those attempting that pretence remind me of someone holding on with all their might to the pendulum. But pendulums swing. It’s what they do.

Today’s capitalism may have a more benign face than in past centuries, but there remain global corporations of great power and rapacious attitudes; major fossil fuel corporations exemplify this. For them ecocide – whether from environmental destruction, or from the poisonous prevalence of plastics – seems a necessary, if unfortunate, by-product if they are to continue powering the world with their gas, oil and coal.

These corporations must know that they will not survive at scale without radically changing their outputs to fit a world centred on sustainability but, rather than urgently redirecting their substantial reserves to embrace the necessary sustainable technologies, they are doubling down on planetary destruction. In doing so they are bringing about their own, inevitable demise.

Fossil fuel corporations have continued to thrive because too few governments have had the courage to challenge them: Australia’s economy depends on our fossil fuel exports. We must break this grip. The will for this must come from the people; where the people lead, the government will follow. We must embrace science-based reality, accept that we will ultimately be responsible for environmental disaster if we leave this rapacious capitalism unchecked. We must adopt the common good as a vital goal.