Jump to content

Will the peasants revolt in 2022?


old man emu
 Share

Recommended Posts

Everyone seems to be sick and tired of politicians and their conniving with their Corporate masters.

 

Everyone has had to swallow the bitter pill of lockdowns in order to control a pandemic. A lot of people believe that the lockdowns could have been averted if the Federal Government had relied on medical fact rather than spiritual faith when the message of a coming epidemic was first broadcast. At the same time we have had to bear the revelations of countless examples of politicians embezzling the Nation assets, mainly tax dollars, to the profit of their masters.

 

2022 is an Federal election year. Australians need to vote on the Senate by late May. But the Lower House can continue on without an election until September. The Prime Minister has said he wants to go full term, but the longer he leaves it, the greater the risk of another plot twist in the COVID-19 saga harming his political health. The Prime Minister could call a half election, sending people to the polls twice in one year. Usually, a prime minister would only do this if they knew their government was on the nose and they wanted to delay the inevitable. He's done it with submarines, who's to say the Prime Minister won't do it with an election. He's like a man drowning in a flooded river, grasping at passing twigs in the hope of saving himself.

 

Will the electorate see him and his Government for what it is, and hose them from the Houses of Parliament? Going on past experience, all I can do is repeat to you Hebrews 13: 8

Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever.

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the past is any indication they'll vote according to sky 2GB 3AW etc and the Murdoch, Costello and Stokes newspapers want.  There's not much diversity in the MSM and therefore NO credibility. Gina Gave a talk to the pupils at her old school  a day or so ago and informed them there is NO global Warming. it's all a lie ..  Her personal "worth" is about 36 Billion, SHE also advocates a FINE for ALL crimes.. BIG Clive spent 60 million on advertising against Labor. HE reckons that's how democracy works. Shows how much she and He get it.. and how much you "peasants" count in their view of the world.  They will also be leading the push for a higher GST with a broader base.  That's the one that taxes the poor most. Nev . 

  • Like 3
  • Agree 1
  • Sad 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The greatest single problem Australia faces is that we have a political system that does not provide leaders that are Statesmen and Stateswomen - only political party hacks. There is no-one amongst the current crop of politicians who has outstanding leadership qualities and who could produce a long-term plan to improve life for all Australians, improve our water, energy and food security, and to keep the "money moguls" in their boxes where they belong.

There is a major and pressing need to increase taxes on the super rich and to prevent them using their massive wealth to promote their aims - which is simply a bigger slice of the nations wealth for themselves.

  • Like 1
  • Agree 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I keep saying this... vote for incremental change, don't just do a donkey because you're in despair at the mediocrity (or worse) across the board.

 

If the LNP get rewarded for their woeful performance by winning the next election it'll just encourage them to do more of the same.

  • Agree 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Marty_d said:

I keep saying this... vote for incremental change, don't just do a donkey because you're in despair at the mediocrity (or worse) across the board.

 

If the LNP get rewarded for their woeful performance by winning the next election it'll just encourage them to do more of the same.

The reality is that we are, and probably always be, a two party system. For anyone unhappy with the government, there are two options. Vote them in again and continue the dissatisfaction with them. Or vote Labor to get rid of them. The voter may eventually end up unhappy with Labor as well, but at least change would have been tried.

 

It's amazing how many people continually whinge about the government, but fail to cast the most effective vote to get rid of them.

  • Agree 2
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Labor might have a bigger following if the Conservatives had not brought in individual contracts, thereby dissociating individuals from the rest of those in the same occupation.

 

Another factor is that trade unionism is very much a part of the British culture. Now that the adherents to that culture are being diluted by immigration from countries where workers are not organised, the labour movement and its political wing are being weakened. The conservatives, who control the information, further undermine the ability of workers to unite for a fair share of the wealth, with mis-information and scare-mongering. Every time a Union calls for a withdrawal of labour, the Conservatives cry out how "the man in the street" will suffer greatly. At the same time, these Conservatives create unsupported wealth by gambling on the Stock Market.

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

BOTH of them should get a name change that's more relaxant to their current alignment 

 

Liberals change to "Screw you peasant"

Nationals change to " "And your bloody horse, too"

Greens change to "What part of 'NO' don't you get?"

Labor change to "The working class can kiss my R's"

Independents change to "Cats 'n' laser pointers"

  • Like 1
  • Winner 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, old man emu said:

Another factor is that trade unionism is very much a part of the British culture.

Quite true, but so is our political system, including a 2 party system with a third sometimes holding the balance of power. Our legal system is also based on British culutre (although, with indigenous title, there is a slight bifurcation).

 

If I were in Australia next year (which I should be) I would have a real issue with who to vote for (sorry, Marty). SFM is a no-no as far as I am concerned (as are most of the LNP as they have had to go too far right... and they aren't great money managers, anyway).

 

Look at the youtoob vid below. It is the full response to the federal budget by Albanese. The most interesting part is the beginning as the chamber is organising itself. I could only handle a short stint of the episode. With few exceptions, people generally vote for the party and the swinging voters vote for the leader of the party. Everything Albense said that I heard made absolute sense, but it was like he was a nervous schoolboy reading it in front of a school assembly. The leader has ti inspire and provide the strength to have the courage of the convictions. Sadly, Albanese desperately lacks these qualities. In fact, on these alone, SFM will probably fare better (not comapring ethics, policy or anything else) as a leader.  Given Labours traditional history of infighting, they will be perceived

 

Who else is there to vote for? Independents are probably the best best, but sadly, it is not in Australia's psyche (generally). The Greens? The leader seems little more than a political hack himself.  Clive Palmer/Craig Kelly's poop-show - hopefully they will take enough of the nutter vote from the LNP to help the LNP lose a few seats (but without them gaining their own).

 

The other option is that Labour is re-doing a 1983 when they replaced Bill Hayden with Bob Hawke.. Afterwards, Bill famously said that a drover's dog could win the election. He is right - they are much loved and renowned for their ability to get things done. They will always be able to win an election over a politician.

 

They may be relying on the "Trump" effect - SFM is so bad, they will vote any old almost senile bloke in (I am not saying Albanese is that).

 

There really is little choice at the moment

 

 

 

 

  • Winner 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was reflecting on the general sense of feeling that those of us who have participated in politically orientated discussions in various threads here. I think that there is one thing that, Party allegiance aside, we all agree on is that the governing of our country needs to be picked up by the shoulders and given a good shaking. I've seen lots of good ideas proposed here that would result in benefits for all Australians if they were introduced. However, there is one major problem that we here cannot overcome. We have the wisdom of our ages, but our ages are close to the end.

 

It takes a long time in a democratic society to change the heading that the Ship of State sails. Without discussing policies, look at Hitler. It took him ten years from 1923 to 1933 to go from being a member of a small local political group in Munich to having that political group form government. Who amongst us can honestly say that our health would sustain us through a ten-year battle? And where is the base of angry people which can be signed-on to sail that Ship? 

 

The most recent "generations" of our people have had it too good all their lives. They have not had to struggle against anything. Political change is fuelled by dissent. If people believe everything is hunky-dory, where are the seeds of dissent?

  • Like 2
  • Agree 1
  • Winner 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, old man emu said:

If people believe everything is hunky-dory, where are the seeds of dissent?

The seeds are there, but people are to scared to plant them, help them grow and take some responsibility for them.

 

1 hour ago, old man emu said:

Who amongst us can honestly say that our health would sustain us through a ten-year battle? And where is the base of angry people which can be signed-on to sail that Ship? 

Hope I can last at least that long, modern medical science has already given us the tools to extend out lives, all we have to do is use them in the right way. Doubt the so called peasants will revolt, although a larger number may vote for independents, or informal, but the depth of ignorance and self centered within the ruling elite, even if only 30% of the people voted they would make some excuse and then try to charge voters with failing to vote.

 

It's like the census, many don't wan to be involved, but they are being charged over $200 a day for failing to lodge their census documents or making a mistake. It shows we are getting closer and closer to a totalitarian police state and even our cops are becoming unreliable and more USA in their approach. Having talked to a couple of young cops in the last few months, they are clueless and only into the prestige and power being a cop gives them.

 

Really think it's gone beyond the point of no return, unless the people of Aus revolt at the next election, just dig your grave and hop in, it's going to be a horrific journey into the future.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, facthunter said:

Do the opposite of what Murdoch pushes and we will be alright.  Nev

There's a few like that.

 

- the Institute of Public Affairs

- Sky News

- Andrew Bolt

- Alan Jones

- the crazies (Craig Kelly, Pauline Hanson, Bob Katter, George Christensen, Clive Palmer etc)

- Peter Dutton

- Business Council of Australia

 

In general, the best path is whatever is exactly opposite to their viewpoint.

  • Like 2
  • Agree 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Dax said:

Having talked to a couple of young cops in the last few months, they are clueless and only into the prestige and power being a cop gives them.

I used to be proud to say that I was one of Her Majesty's Constables in and for the State Of New South Wales, but the lack of professionalism, self-discipline and knowledge of what their real duty to the community is exhibited by police now makes me avoid mentioning how I spent 28 years of my life for fear of being tarred with the same brush as those in the Office of Constable nowadays.

 

But that is a topic for another place.

  • Like 1
  • Winner 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

OME - that is really sad indictment on the current standards of the profession. Alas, it is not confined to the state of NSW, nor to Australia. I was listening to a radio program where an ex-policeman was on the radio giving an interview and he made the same remark.


And then this pops up in my yootoob feed, and even if only half of the prediction is true, we wonder what the poop has gone wrong.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7cR4fXcsu9w

 

  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Marty_d said:

- the Institute of Public Affairs

- Sky News

- Andrew Bolt

- Alan Jones

- the crazies (Craig Kelly, Pauline Hanson, Bob Katter, George Christensen, Clive Palmer etc)

- Peter Dutton

- Business Council of Australia

Marty, how did numbers three and four on the list manage to escape from number five? Please explain.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you read this article, it is clear that to get anything done, the problem you want solved has to be the problem of the most senior ranking pollies: https://www.theage.com.au/politics/federal/how-barnaby-joyce-sent-the-fear-of-god-through-big-tech-20211008-p58ycm.html

 

I get that Barnaby Joyce's daughter had an unfounded rumour put out that she was in a relationship with Barilaro, and I get that trolls and "grubs" pounced on it, and it would have hurt her feelings and caused her anxiety. So, it is right that he pick up the phone to the PM and say enough is enough - and of course the PM seeing enough is enough, made a statement about it and is probably now on another crusade.

 

While I sympathise with Ms. Joyce, it doesn't look like she is going to commit suicide from it, and it is, utlimately people unknown to her that are bullyng her. Sadly, the same response wasn't garnered from our top pollies when this happened: https://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/real-life/news-life/dolly-everetts-parents-reveal-what-led-to-their-daughters-death/news-story/b7984758aa1ce96def787ad0c20cde93

 

Yes, they set up some response, but it wasn't to say, well, enough was enough and it is time to get tough from it.. Nor would they from the too many numbers of suicides before or after.

 

So, if the peasants are to revolt to get something done, it looks like, they need to give the pollies a serve of what the issue is.


Of course, I would not condone or encourage such an approach..  But if pollies don't start to act in peoples' interests with the same gusto, some others may be tempted to do so..

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Isn't it amazing that an allegedly "sovereign" Nation like Australia cannot make its own laws without first seeking the approval of US corporations? 

 

These corporations have done more long term damage to the mental health of our younger generation than Goebbels did to the children of Germany. It feels odd for me to say this, but, "Onya, Barnaby!" 

 

This should be his battle hymn:

 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Old Koreelah said:

His advice might save Australia.

Doubt that, like everywhere else we are to far down the track to turn it all around and he along with lots of other drop kicks who have realised how wrong they were, are part of the problem, over population.

 

The only thing that can save Australia, is to get rid of the political party system and replace it with real people power in the form of online people controlled open government. However even though many may agree in their minds, in practise they will never change, changing direction is something modern humans can't understand, it frightens them to death. Which is and will be the outcome because of that delusional non existent fear.

  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

BUT

It,s history that made mankind have too many offspring.

Only three or four generations ago most babies DidNot survive childhood,

Things improved after the ww 1 ,but there was a new need for ' canon fodder '.

After ww2 things were much better, And the next generation could be INSURED. 

The first time in human history babies under one year had an insurable chance of survival.

So which generation will have Less children than the two, it took to conceive !.

spacesailor

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, spacesailor said:

Things improved after the ww 1 ,but there was a new need for ' canon fodder '.

Spacey, I agree with most of what you said, but have to pull you up on the quoted statement.


The 14-18 War was supposed to be the war to end all wars. There was no need to create "cannon fodder". Since the majority of the people whose ancestry was European were shocked and reviled at the magnitude of death and destruction wrought in WWI, in the years afterwards they had no desire to take up arms again. The only need was to replace those lost to society from war. It just so happened that the good Christian politicians of the Allies did not have enough Christianity to forgive. They saddled Germany with the debt of the war, and broke up the Austro-Hungarian Empire. (Don't forget that it was the Austro-Hungarians who actually started the whole thing).

 

Having learned from that mistake, after WWII, the victors made sure that Germany and Japan were rebuilt, but with somewhat sensible restrictions on military growth. As a result,  Europeans have not gone to war with each other for nearly 80 years. Probably the longest period without wars in Europe since Modern Man bumped into Neanderthal Man.

  • Agree 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...