Suburban Scrawl

The attitude of many older people to the issues facing younger Australians is overwhelmingly patronising. While not the behaviour of everyone, it is difficult not to be insulted by previous generations who sit comfortably reaping the rewards ignorant of the struggles faced by younger Australians. This writing is a review of the struggles and challenging facing young Australians from the ages of 15 to 25 in the year 2004. It is not an attempt to say that struggles of any particular time are better or worse than any other time, but rather a review of a time and a place.

Loss of Job Security

We do not have job security. The work force has changed to the point where we acknowledge that most people will have a number of major career changes in their life time. We could argue all day about whether this is good or not, but the reality is that this situation is a reflection of low job security. We can not trust to have the job we have in six months time, particularly since we are the young and expendible. How can we go comfortably into a home loan or anything when we have no job security? How are we meant to feel comfortable when we could lose our job and in effect everything if there is a slight economic down turn?

Casualised Work Force

Many of us can not get full time work because employers employ us as casual so they do not have to pay holiday and sick pay. They still employ us for reasonable hours, but make sure we are utterly expendible. This ensures we have minimal rights and minimal job security (see 'loss of job security').

Housing

The costs of renting or buying a house have spiralled upwards. Those of us without rich families are in dire straits when it comes to the living expenses of moving out of home. The situation makes it very hard to move out of home and means the Australian dream is out of reach for many of us. Furthermore, the 'on the edge' nature of housing means those of us who extend heavily to be able to afford a house run the real risk of a housing bust where we lose everything.

Cost Of Living

Along with the cost of home loans or rent, the general cost of living is spiralling upwards. Public health care is being destroyed by the Howard government, meaning that expensive private health care will be necessary. It is simply becoming more and more difficult to afford the cost of living. This makes it hard to survive on one wage, meaning that many parents are currently forced and will continue to be forced to work rather than be parents.

Long Working Hours

Working hours in Australia are among the highest in the western world. We are genuinely scared of being tied to our jobs so hard that we do not get time for leisure and family time. The fact that in many jobs there is a subtle force to do unpaid overtime and other work simply to remain employed and not face unemployment makes many of us feel utterly powerless.

Education Costs

Unless you come from a well off middle or upper class family, education costs a lot of money. Part time jobs go some way, but educational costs like books, transport, printing, union fees and more make university very expensive. Those who do not pay HECS (Higher Education Contribution Scheme) charges upfront then carry a huge debt burden at the same time as trying to move out of home, get a footing in the real world and so forth.

Family?

The combination of strains mean starting a family is a lot more difficult and tends to only be feasible in the distant long term. Financial realities of high living costs, low job security and large debts including HECS put family well in the background. Even if you bit the bullet, the often necessity of both parents working and long hours to keep a job mean little family time. Having a family is becoming more difficult for those without top notch jobs or wealthy parents themselves.

# posted by Stuart Anthony Fenech : 21:01  0 comments

In Australia we use a voting system best described as optional preferential voting. This is a review of how the system works, to help you make the best voting decisions.

The system is best explained by an example. Let's say there are five politicians vying for a position:

• John (currently has the position)
• Cletus
• Mohammed
• Hong
• Leroy

For a legitimate vote, you put a number next to one or more candidates starting at 1. Positions other than '1' are called 'preferential' and are not compulsory, leading to our voting system being referred to as optional preferential. Examples of valid votes include:

• 1 next to Cletus.
• 1 next to Hong, 2 next to Leroy.
• 1 next to John, 2 next to Mohammed, 3 next to Leroy, 4 next to Cletus, 5 next to Hong.

When judging the election outcome, only the top two contenders are taken into account. Let's say the '1' votes are as follows:

• 38% John
• 33% Cletus
• 16% Mohammed
• 6% Hong
• 7% Leroy

Depending on the preferential votes (those other than '1'), the votes for Leroy, Hong and Mohammed are either discarded or added to John or Cletus. If the person did not put a number next to Cletus or John, their vote is discarded. If they put a number next to Cletus of John, their vote is directed to the one they preferred. This procedure is best shown by examples:

• 1 Hong, 2 Mohammed. Vote discarded.
• 1 Hong, 2 Mohammed, 3 Leroy. Vote discarded.
• 1 Hong, 2 Mohammed, 3 Leroy, 4 Cletus. Vote counted for Cletus.
• 1 Hong, 2 Mohammed, 3 Leroy, 4 Cletus, 5 John. Vote counted for Cletus.
• 1 Cletus, 2 Hong. Vote counted for Cletus.
• 1 John, 2 Cletus. Vote counted for John.
• 1 Mohammed, 2 John. Vote counted for John.

The optional preferential voting system therefore has some consequences that may not be expected. From here, I review how to vote appropriately under different circumstances.

Point 1: Use Your Preferences

Except for when you equally hate the worst candidates, always fully use your preferences. As in, if there are five candidates than number them from 1 to 5. This ensures that your vote does count in the final evaluation of the two most popular candidates and for the one you prefer of the two. If you equally hate the worst candidates, use all of your other preferences and do not number the candidates you despise. This simply means that if you equally despise the two strongest candidates, your vote will be discarded rather than going to one of them.

Point 2: If You Hate The Current Member, Put Them Last

If you despise your current elected representative, make sure you use full preferential voting and put them last. How you number the other positions on your voting card is not overly relevant because your vote will automatically go to whoever is the second most popular candidate.

Point 3: Follow How-To-Vote Cards Of Minor Parties

If you want to vote for a person or party like the Greens that is not going to win, follow their how to vote card. Their how to vote card will have their preferences set to go to the major contender they prefer. Decisions on preference recommendations of minor parties are not made lightly and you do support the minor party by allocating preferences the way they recommend.

Point 4: If You Donkey Vote, Do It With Style

Entire elections have been won and lost based on the 'donkey vote'. This type of vote is most commonly seen in the form of numbering the candidates down the page starting at '1'. So the member first on the vote card gets a '1', the next person listed gets a '2' and so forth. This type of voting, while done as a sign of indifference to voting, strengthens the person at the top of the voting card. If you are going to donkey vote, the best way is to write a creative message to entertain the people who count the votes.

# posted by Stuart Anthony Fenech : 21:03  0 comments

Saturday's "Courier Mail" contained the survey results of an interesting question of far more significance that the usual loaded or superfluous questions released to the public. Asked if we would vote in Saturday's council elections if they were not compulsory, 45% expressed the view that they would not vote. This is hardly unsurprising, given how little council does for the average person, but is also a demonstration of how little we care about politics in this country. Given the general indifference that we show towards politics, I believe that we deserve the second rate politicians that we usually receive.

In this article I review reasons why we care little for politics in this country. Our carelessness is a reflection of society and the nature of politics. The strength of our democracy depends on our keen interest and voice in relation to political events. We need to work towards removing the systematic weaknesses that lead to our carelessness for the sake of the future of this country.

Lies

Politicians have a reputation for gross dishonesty via the great gapes between what they promise and what they deliver. Whether you call them lies or mistakes of judgement at a prior moment in time is irrelevant. Politicians are renowned for saying one thing and doing another. This shatters any sense of truth that may otherwise exist between the government and the average person. Errors in the truth stakes are not limited to a particular party, though each attempts to present the other as a dishonest load of mongrels.

Differentiation

Most elections come down to a choice between two major forces or a rebellious vote that does not count anyway. The problem is that there is not much a perceived difference between major contenders in elections on all levels. At state and federal elections, people no longer believe there is much of a difference in policy or effect between the Liberal/National Coalition and the Labor Party. The confusion started when the left wing based Labor Party started representing more than just the 'workers', privatised the Commonwealth Bank and generally shifted from it's traditional distinctive positioning. The moving together of the two sides of the political spectrum has confused politics to the point where people simply do not identify the differences between the parties anymore. This unsurprisingly reinforces the popular view of "things would not be different if the other party was in" and "no matter who you vote for, you get a politician". The lack of differentiation is a failure of the decision makers of the major political parties. Thankfully the noticeable shift towards the right wing authoritarian position by the Liberal Party means that the 2004 federal election may see clear distinctions made.

Ignorance

People are largely ignorant of the issues that they are supposed to be making a judgement on when they vote. Entertainment takes priority over information and our mainstream media reflects this by continually moving toward the American "infotainment" media. Our mainstream media in the form of commercial television and newspapers is structured to sell but not to provide quality information to enrich the public debate. This makes the role of pubic funded media like the ABC television and radio all the more important. News is not news if it's primary role is the sell and entertain and that is where we are heading. An informed public making informed decisions is necessary to maintain the strength of our democracy.

Self Centred World Views

Since World War 2 we have gradually moved towards a more self centred society, where "me" is of more importance than "us". This is reflected on how we treat politics, for many people do not show an interest because they believe there is "nothing in it for me". This is an error of judgement, for bad leaders and governments affect everyone. Although naturally this can be justified as "it would have been the same with the other party", this is rarely correct. All political parties are to some extent reflections of our apathetic view towards politics.

Voting For Personalities

The average person is so grossly uninformed that voting comes down to picking the person they like the most when they see them on television. I know that there were people who did not vote for Labor leader Kim Beazley in 2001 because he was "fat". The media shows the theatrics because that gets the attention of people, but are light on policy debate leading to the inevitable conclusion of people voting for personalties. Voting for personalities over policy further degrades the quality of our democracy. We need to keep our eye on the ball and make better decisions if we expect anything more than people with a trustworthy aura to rule this country.

Special Interest Perversion

Our governments often give the impression of pandering to special interest groups while failing to represent the majority. This observation may not be absolutely realistic but the feeling remains. We clearly need a more open government to add legitimacy to politics. Latham's "open government" policies are precisely what is required on this front. The policies include a registration process for political lobby groups and published information on the Internet covering these lobby groups.

Accountability

Those who watch politics can also be disgusted with the lack of accountability shown by governments. The fact that governments often make decisions then spend most of their time defending the decision and blaming others for failings. John Howard has made this an art form in how "children overboard" and "weapons of mass destruction in Iraq" were all someone else's fault for telling him the wrong thing, despite the fact these naughty people who told the porkies retain their jobs without question. By electing our leaders, we trust them to make the best decisions by using the best information available. We do not expect them to make decisions light-handedly on sketchy information and then not take responsibility for their actions. We deserve better accountability from governments and unless we demand it, the people in power are going to continue to play us for fools.

Conclusion

Our democratic system is not in the best of condition in Australia. A combination of substandard politics and our indifference is leading us down a path where our democratic system will continue to weaken. Politics is important for our personal future and the future of this country and hence we need to accept that we must take a role in it's application. We need to make decisions based on policies over personalities if we expect quality governments. We need to viciously reject governments that lie, pander of special interest groups above the general population and refuse to accept accountability for their own decisions. While we continue to treat politics with indifference, we have to expect that we will get the low quality politicians that we deserve.

# posted by Stuart Anthony Fenech : 21:03  0 comments

Disclaimer: This is a sarcastic piece of writing that implicitly attacks the less ethical business people in Australia. There are many excellent, kind and caring people who are high up in business in Australia. Small business, in particular, contains many great people. This writing is definitely not targeted at these fine people.

In the good old days, a well to do gent of good breeding could employ many a manual worker without concern for matters such as health and safety, minimum wages, and such other business impeding propositions. Then along came these "unions" and honourable men were forced to pay more due to "collective bargaining" and other disgraceful concepts. It seemed like the days of glossing over a few miners or rail workers disappearing every second week were going to be in the past. We always paid these lower classes enough to eat occasionally but that was not enough for these selfish blighters. These business destroying mongrels made many an honourable man even have to consider a loan to purchase his latest addition to his exotic motor vehicle collection.

The good news it that there are always champions out there to push for our personal cause. Here we present the attitudes, arguments and mechanisms you can use to maximise your own position while most importantly screwing over your workers as much as possible.

Vote For The Liberal Party

The Liberal Party knows that is what is best for business is what is best for society. We are wonderful people that kiss babies because we employ people and do not every forget that. By representing our interests more than the people of the country, we can be assured the best deal from the Liberal Party. Whatever you do, do not vote for those horrid Labor types, who associate with unions and represent the average person, because they try to take our money and make us provide decent pay and workplace conditions.

Specialise In Low Skill Business

You will find that it is easier to work people for very little when your business area involves low amounts of skill. Do not hesitate to subtly hint to your employees that they are easily expendable, particularly if they ever question their incredibly low pay. Best of all, replace employees every so often to keep a healthy sense of fear in your other low paid slaves because that way they will work well. Never pay your employees enough to have the financial security to be able to feed themselves and look for another job.

Avoid Unions

Never employ people with any association with unions because they might have some power. You need to be able to pay people as little as possible, have them work in minimum conditions and generally fear for the state of their job constantly. You need to have the upper hand because it's your money they are making. The blighters should be happy and eternally grateful to you for having any job at all. When attacking unions, refer to them as supporting "regressive" industrial practices, despite the fact we yearn for the great days before unions.

Casualise Your Work Force

Employee as many people as possible as casual staff members, even if they are working full time. This allows you to avoid sick and holiday pay, and makes employees even more expendable on short notice.

Check Out Traineeships and Apprenticeships

For many types of work, trainees and apprentices can perform all work duties of more experienced staff. The perk is that you can employ people at below the minimum wage if they are mere trainees or apprentices. This is the most legal way to get phenomenally cheap labour known to the business world. Use it wisely.

Perpetual Firing Of Older Employees

You will find that your business is cheaper to run with younger employees. Continually fire your employees as they get older so that you can make more money. They should be happy to have ever had a job in the first place. Remember that this process is a lot easier when you only employ people on a casual basis.

Believe In Markets

Many people genuinely believe in markets to the point of it almost being a religion. You will find that you can use market logic to justify treating your employees in any way you want. Minimum wages are a "market distortion" that raise unemployment. Providing decent pay and conditions means we lose business to other countries. Believe and propagate the myth that the market will sort out all problems because markets are wonderful.

Publicly Slam Opponents

Anything that even slightly compromises your lofty position is to be publicly slammed. Claim that every single action against your interests will mean certain destruction for business and employment, even if you know it will have little effect. Even if you are making absolutely insane profits on a business like child care, claim that paying employees any more would cause child care prices to rise substantially. Always subvert the debate to be about business and never, ever allow the debate to approach social matters. If social matters can not be avoided, arguments like "that's nice but if we can not afford to employee them then that is ever worse" are splendid.

Unpaid Overtime

It is a well known secret that employers can subtly enforce unpaid overtime. This is done by creating a feeling that the employee will lose their job if they do not 'pull their weight' and this involves unpaid overtime. This is a top way to bleed more out of your workers than otherwise would be accepted.

Use AWA's

Australian Workplace Agreements (AWA's) allow you and your employee to 'negotiate' terms of employment. Being in the much more experienced and powerful position you have a lot of power in this 'negotiation' process. Remembering that you are dealing mainly with low skill work where people tend to not be intelligent, resourceful or powerful. This means you can legally employ people under brilliantly low pay and conditions. Labor is proposing to remove AWA's and you should naturally publicly slam this as bad for business.

Blame Everyone Else

Whenever you decide to make more money by getting rid of some employees and making others work harder, blame others. The government is always the best place to start, particularly if it happens to be a Labor government currently in power. Other proven excuses include 'competitiveness', 'sales are down', and so forth. Never admit that you are simply phenomenally greedy.

# posted by Stuart Anthony Fenech : 21:05  0 comments

Dear EMI,

Thankyou for sending me a copy of Starsailor's "Silence Is Easy" album without copy protection. It plays nicely in all CD drives and general CD players that I have happened to place the disc. After approximately five complaints to your company, this olive branch is appreciated and is an example of good public relations. However, now I am even more confused than previously. Unless the head does not know what the tail is doing, there is some serious confusion within EMI about the entire issue of copy protection. I am writing to clarify the practical realities of copy protection that are left when you remove the spin, propaganda, lobby groups and other rubbish associated with the debate.

1. Copy protection loses you sales.

Many people are aware that when they buy a copy protected CD, it is unlikely to play in many of their CD players. Rightly and fairly, these people often choose not to buy copy protected CD's. Your loss is mainly of music lovers with large collections of music such as myself, who do not like purchasing a sub standard product. Inevitably any decline in sales will be blamed on 'piracy', but record companies are shooting themselves in the foot with copy protection.

2. Copy protected CD's are easily copied.

Using an average home personal computer, copy protected CD's can be copied. This can be done either with or without keeping the copy protection on the disc for authenticity. It is only a matter of time before major hauls of pirated CD's surface where the 'copy protection' has been copied along with the rest of the disc. It is not rocket science.

3. Copy protection should not be used yet

By all means, I look forward to seeing technology that makes it difficult for people to make money out of piracy. I still reserve the right, even if it is illegal, to convert music I purchase into another form so I can listen to it on my computer (copy protection does not currently stop this, if you get the right CD drive, by the way). Given this, I and most other music lovers do not like piracy much either. We may be angry with record companies that sell us garbage that will not play, but we love our artists. We do not want our artists to starve because some rotten sod is knocking off their music. But until the technology is at a point where it can actually stop copying, then it is not worth losing sales and annoying your customers.

4. Management need to listen

The complaints we send to EMI appear to be handled by Public Relations (PR) people. We are your customers and we are telling you what is happening in the real world. Copy protection is such a farce yet management clearly do not know the full picture because they continue with it.

As it happens, I now personally own about eight EMI copy protected CD's, though I would have purchased a lot more if it was not for copy protection. For only about half of these CD's I have sent formalised complaints. Sometimes, a young male does not want to put it on the public record that he picked up "PopArt", the two CD Pet Shop Boys 'best of'. The more publicly acceptable Paul Kelly "Ways and Means" album is also among those about which I have not sent a complaint.

Although I have had more offers than just the Starsailor album for replacements, I am not going to take up your offer. The reason is that I want EMI, rather than wasting a few cents sending me additional copies of albums I have already copied to normal CD's, to think about copy protection. I want the management of EMI to seriously consider the ramifications of copy protection in line with my comments, which reflect the view of many music lovers.

Thankyou for your time.

Yours sincerely

# posted by Stuart Anthony Fenech : 21:00  0 comments

Last night Australian time there was a terrorist attack in Madrid, Spain, where over 190 people were killed. A group of innocent people boarding or getting off their morning train who shall never board a train again. The truth is sketchy at the moment and may never be known but a group strongly linked to Osama Bin Ladin's Al Qaeda terror network have claimed responsibility.

Spain was one of the four countries that jumped at the opportunity to invade Iraq, along with Australia, the UK and, of course, the hawks in the USA. Mugs titled "friends and allies" were made in Texas parading the four countries and their leaders. Now Spain has suffered the worst terrorist ever seen on Spanish soil in the form of a bombs set off in commuter trains. An absolute atrocity committed by organisations that our "war on terror" has failed to stop.

Unfortunately this should not come as any surprise. The main feeling I have towards the events is pity and disappointment at the absolutely pointless waste of human life. The event itself could not be less surprising to me or many other people who have been watching global events in the last few years. Worst of all, the chances of more instances like this are high and Australia's first major terrorist attack may not be too far away.

Terrorism because a big global issue after the September 11 2001 attacks in the USA. Before then, terrorism was not something discussed in the USA or Australia. Terrorism has since developed to be the modern fear, quickly approaching the legendary fear of communism. You are still more likely to die tomorrow from a trip or a fall than terrorism, but some events make better news than others.

The USA, in an spectacular display of foreign relations incompetence, managed to turn global sympathy after the 2001 terrorist attacks into global dislike within two years. Support was loosely given by most countries for the American action in Afghanistan, a known terrorist haven for Al Qaeda and friends. Where America fell apart was in it's invasion of Iraq, a country with insignificant at best links with Al Qaeda. The entire story of the invasion in Iraq stunk, whether it was debatable claims of weapons of mass destruction (WMD), garbage insinuations that Iraq was involved in September 11 2001, the ongoing exaggerations, the outdated 'evidence' or the obvious warmongering. Of course Iraq had WMD as some point because it is on the public record that America and other countries sold them said WMD.

Invading an Islamic country with a conveniently large supply of the natural resources of oil on tenuous grounds created disagreement around the world. Even in war supporting countries like Australia, the UK and Spain the public opinion was not clearly supporting a war in Iraq. The US poured billions of dollars into the war in Iraq as part of the "war on terror" when not one shred of credible evidence linked Iraq with Al Qaeda. The majority of the world, not as malleable as the American public and not as exposed to pro war propaganda, was overwhelmingly anti war.

The most important item to note is that the invasion of Iraq was the best thing George Walker Bush and friends could have possibly done to make sure we get more terrorism. As explained, the dodgy invasion of Iraq was incredibly unpopular and hence a lot more people hate America now than ever before. In many ways, the invasion legitimised extremist Islamic organisations killing innocent people. America planted itself firmly in the hearts and minds of people around the world as the instigator, the aggressor and the enemy. By driving anti American sentiment to a new level, America has ensured that terrorist organisations have a plentiful supply of potential recruits. Specialised terrorist propaganda schools need not grab as many people now that America is making recruiting people who hate America a breeze.

Another important part in making America the monster in the world has been the 'axis of evil' talk. By labelling Iraq, Iran and North Korea 'evil' countries, America has made sure that these countries could never have been their good friends. Simply human relations states that if you give a dog a bad name, the chances are they will live up to it. The countries may, in fear, adhere to the demands of the USA, but rest assured that most people within those countries will hate America. Interestingly, the whole 'do what I say or we'll starve your people and probably invade you' foreign policy of the USA is the textbook dictionary definition of terrorism.

ter·ror·ism ( P ) Pronunciation Key (tr-rzm) Noun
The unlawful use or threatened use of force or violence by a person or an organized group against people or property with the intention of intimidating or coercing societies or governments, often for ideological or political reasons.

The recent segments of the "war on terror" have been an absolute disaster in the dynamics of the world. Where once were friends and allies, the world is split, the United Nations is weakened, and uncertainty runs amok. The actions of America have added legitimacy to terrorism in the minds of millions of people and we are far from an end to terrorism.

If America and friends wanted to end terrorism they would address the causes. Most importantly, America needs to act more responsible on the global level rather than maximise it's own position without caring what impact this has on other countries. The actions of America in many areas lead to extreme anger from a lot of people in a lot of countries. America needs to stop blindly supporting Israel, which uses American power as leverage to do actions that would otherwise be deemed completely unacceptable. America needs to emphasise free trade instead of just free trade where it will benefit America while maintaining heavily protected sectors.

The other major cause of terrorism is poverty, gross inequality of wealth and other situations that contribute to the creation of angry young men and women willing to commit their lives to terrorist ideals. Instead of spending money in the delicate art of warfare, America could go a long way to alleviating societal problems that encourage terrorism. I wonder how many people will want to kill Americans if Americans feed their family, give them an education and maybe even employ them.

America has not thought for long enough to deal with the causes of terrorism. Instead they are attempting conventional warfare along with substantial allegations, dubious claims and ambiguous threats. America is playing a very old game of trying to fix violence with violence, a known recipe for absolute failure. You can not convince anyone to do anything, let alone a country, by threatening to beat them up if they are naughty. You might get people or countries doing what you want, but it is the calm before the storm. You might obey a violent criminal who breaks into your home, but that does not mean you respect them or plan to indefinitely adhere to their whims.

While America attempts to fight terrorism from one angle, terrorism is being strengthened on the other by America's foreign policy. What this means is that there are still a lot of terrorists out there willing to do very violent things to innocent people. The only difference between now and four years ago is that terrorists have a lot more publicity and America's foreign actions means they have more support. The terrorists have got more credit, support and power than they used to have and this is mainly to the credit of America. By virtue of their action, America is ensuring terrorism is as much of a problem as ever.

As long as George Walker Bush is in power in America, we can be assured that terrorism will continue to flourish. Bush speaks of destroying terrorism but acts in a way that legitimise terrorism to many people in the world. War is good for politicians and perpetual war means a level of continual popularity for politicians like Bush. It is unlikely that any leader is deliberately creating a perpetual war, but the political advantages of such a situation are not to be taken lightly.

Terrorists know that they are not going to get their supposed claims like Israel out of Palestine by acts of terrorism. The whole ploy by terrorists is nothing more than a grab for power, prestige and money. With this in mind, terrorists will want George Walker Bush and his allies in power for as long as possible. If the terrorists out there are really smart, they will lodge a few terrorist attacks in America immediately prior to the presidential elections later this year. With the dreadful issue of Iraq and incompetent financial management catching up with Bush, big violent terrorist attacks are the only way Bush will retain power. Without Bush, terrorists may find a much more reasonable and pragmatic America where it is a lot harder to legitimise the murder of innocent civilians.

Governments that like to call themselves 'conservative' interact with terrorist organisations to form a vicious circle whereby both sides get considerable political mileage. This convenient working together is the fault of human flaws rather than anything sinister. Terrorists and conservative politicians often desire the same thing, which is money and power. Both sides gain from the hard headed and overly stupid manner they respond to each other through propaganda, lies and violence.

It is clear that the outlook for terrorism in 2004 is looking pretty horrid. While terrorist networks have been structurally weakened, they have also been fundamentally strengthened by the action of America and friends. It is likely that we will see more terrorists attacks like the one in Madrid yesterday. To ensure the situation continues to degenerate, there may be terrorist strikes around the time of the American presidential elections to make sure Bush remains in power. Either way, terrorism is here to stay until some decent new initiatives are created that think outside the violence fixes violence mentality.

# posted by Stuart Anthony Fenech : 21:00  0 comments

Sales Lady: Good afternoon, may I please speak to the owner of your business?
Me: May I ask the nature of your phone call?
Sales Lady: I am X with Y and want to ask about your phone bill. You are with Telstra right?
Me: We are happy with our current arrangements.
Sales Lady: We can not help you without knowing your details. You are with Telstra right?
Me: We are not necessarily with Telstra.
Sales Lady: [agitated] Are you with Telstra?
Me: We are happy with our current arrangements and are not interested. Thankyou for calling. Goodbye.

We must get an average of about six telephone sales calls a day like this one at our normal office in the city of Brisbane. I am not the dedicated person who answers the phone but answer it for what ends up being about two hours on an average workday. This is my duty as the most junior staff member in the office, and is a great way to meet people in the larger company. The problem is that when you get persistent sales people, you can not just be a rude obnoxious monster like you can be at home when they interrupt your shower, pool swim, sleep or love making. You have to delicately but forcefully send these people in the dirtiest career invented since prostitution away to bug some other poor sucker.

Let's make one thing completely clear right now. Telephone marketing should be banned in all of it's manifestations with no exceptions. Marketing to private citizens invades the private nature of ones home life and is an absolute annoyance. Marketing to businesses wastes time and costs money because some poor soul has to answer the phone, deduce that they are being sold some rubbish, and then get rid of them.

There is only one group I feel the slightest bit of sympathy for with telephone marketing. These are charities like the Drug Arm and the Red Cross that legitimately do good things for our society. That given, these organisations need to harness other techniques because telephone marketing invades privacy, wastes time, and agitates impressive numbers of people. It does not help a charity to use telephone sales because they instantly create hordes of people who hate them.

A particular breed of telephone sales people like to horde the elderly because they are more susceptible to dishonest sales because of their generally more trusting nature. These sales people are particularly not appreciated and are pathetic excuses for human beings. I know exactly why my Grandma gets masses more telephone sales people than I do and I am not happy about it. I am watching you filthy rotten mongrels who prey on the elderly.

Of course, most telephone sales people do not fit the category of those who prey on the elderly. Most are just run of the mill people who annoy us senseless by interrupting us during dinner or any number of other times. Not to mention the standard rude ones who do not know how to gracefully accept being fobbed off. You rudely interrupt people in the privacy of their homes, you can not expect a sale.

Sometimes, in my house we resort to slightly more proactive measures to agitate telephone sales people. My mother once led on a security system mob for about half an hour when we already had a system, because they had hounded her mother (my grandmother) a couple of weeks earlier. My father led on a young lad from Optus on the speaker phone during dinner one night for entertainment when Dad's dedication to another firm meant Optus was never going to get a sale. Dad figured that while we had them tied up on the phone they could not win a sale anywhere. When I was in about second year university, I got one of those computerised sales calls. I placed the phone in front of my computer speakers and played music for about two hours before hanging up.

Telephone sales are never successful with everyone I know and are nothing more than an annoyance. They invade the privacy of our own home and cost our businesses money in wasted time. It is time telephone sales were completely and comprehensively banned in Australia. Budding telephone sales people will find there are plenty of alternative careers where you can still be hated, like politics.

# posted by Stuart Anthony Fenech : 21:01  0 comments

There are a substantial number of people who vote for the Liberal Party by default at elections. While no one can be perfect, the sheer number of people who vote Liberal disturbs me somewhat. Still, given that a lot of people I know are strict Liberal voters, I have drawn upon many conversations to present this expose of the different types of Liberal voters. Most dedicated Liberal voters are a mix of the characteristics outlined below.

1. Habit.

Characteristics: Many people vote Liberal because that is what they have always done. Usually there is some clichéd saying from a long time ago made by the Liberal Party that has stuck in their heads. The typical Liberal Party mantra believed by this group included "Labor can not handle the economy", "Labor are communists", "Labor put us in debt" and so forth.

Flaws: Clearly little thought has been involved in the decision to vote for the Liberal Party. An informed person does simply accept political rhetoric and analyses policy in the context of it's impact on the real world. These people are not making an informed decision.

2. Fear magnets.

Characteristics: This class of Liberal voter is drawn to the techniques commonly used by the Liberal Party to subdue the population and get them to follow. This group of people often still believe that the communists are out to get us and fall hook, line and sinker for terrorism fear mongering. The conservative side of politics has never been afraid to use irrational fear for political gain and these are the people who fall prey to these techniques.

Flaws: Fear by it's nature does not encourage rational thought. Decent decisions can not be made while consumed by fear. These people are firstly susceptible to flawed logic via the abuse of fear, and secondly are impaired in their judgement after falling for the game of fear.

3. Selfishness.

Characteristics: People who are very wealthy often know that the Liberal Party represents the top end of town while Labor represents the average person. Looked at from a purely short term selfish basis, the Liberal Party offers the best deal for those who do not care about society, only care about themselves and want to be able to do whatever they want irrespective of the harm to other people. The fact that in the long term the Liberal view of society leads to destruction is not relevant to the thought process of these people, nor is a sense of fairness or equality of opportunity. It is all about 'me', not 'we'.

Flaws: We can achieve a lot more as a society than individually. There is little changing the selfish mindset but I find it disappointing.

4. Hate Unions.

Characteristics: This type of person has had a bad run in with the unions and therefore will not vote for Labor, since Labor is associated with the unions. This is a different breed to the 'selfishness' group, who hate unions because they enforce pay and conditions. These people have been badly represented or actively hurt by unions. Perhaps they were once urged to go on strike, got no pay while on strike and the strike was not successful. Perhaps they have been in a union for 20 years and they have done absolutely nothing for them. Perhaps they have had bad experiences where they were not given work because they were not in a union. The effect is still that voting will be against Labor because they are close to the unions.

Flaws: These people, often with very good reason, do not appreciate that unions are important. Without unions, over time we would have a gradual decline in pay and working conditions for many people in the work force. We simply can not expect that the purely selfish motivators of capitalism will result in a good deal for the workers.

5. No Evil.

Characteristics: People who have led a fairly simply and sheltered life do not tend to see much wrong with the world. Just as importantly, those things that are wrong are not that serious and always going to be the case. They have had it easy and do not think anything needs to change because it was worked well for them and the people they know. If everything is good the way it is, they like to cling to the traditional way things have always been because there is simply no need to change. They do well out of the status quo and do not need to threaten that cosy lifestyle.

Flaws: Because life for some people is cosy does not make life for others great. Because some people do not have problems, it does not mean that problems do not exist or should be ignored. These people need to establish an open mind and gain more life experience.

6. Hate Change.

Characteristics: Many people have a fear and great dislike of change. This is the "if it aint broke don't fix it" mentality where something has to be extremely broken before it is fixed. Since Labor is a progressive political party that pursues change, people who have a particular hatred of change inevitably vote for the conservative side of politics that changes very little.

Flaws: Nothing ventured and nothing gained. Keeping the status quo might be comfortable but it prevents a society from moving forward.

7. Moral Disgust.

Characteristics: Labor Party politicians tend to be a lot more foul mouthed, grotesque and lacking in social candour than their conservative party. This is to be expected of a progressive political party with working class original not chained to the restrictions of tradition. However, a certain group of people find the slightly less polished mannerisms abhorrent and hence will not vote for the Labor Party.

Flaws: Pedantic details on the way people talk and act is not a reflection on the quality of their politics.

8. Like Ignorance.

Characteristics: Informed world views are not always ones that help you sleep at night. World views that include scape goats, irrational fear and other unrealistically simple assertions appeal to these people who relish ignorance. It comforts many people to blame Asians, Muslims, Aboriginals, communists and other minority groups they have never met for societies ills. Ignorance helps many people sleep at night and such is the life of this type of Liberal voter.

Flaws: People who enjoy leading a life of ignorance can not expect society to improve in any way whatsoever. In fact, if everyone was ignorant our society would be in a very fast downhill slope towards oblivion.

9. Vote Buying.

Characteristics: People who are personally targeted as a group that will be given some financial perk as a result of the government being elected. The Liberal Party likes to throw around promises and occasionally money, especially to special groups, in the lead up to elections. The people in these groups to benefit have hence had their vote bought.

Flaws: While vote buying may be popular, it does not solve bigger problems. For instance, the Medicare "safety net" will not save Medicare. There are usually a lot better things taxpayer money can be spent on than vote buying.

10. The Indifferent.

Characteristics: Let us face the reality that most people could not care less about politics. It is just a name on a piece of paper. These people vote for the Liberal Party because they do not care and may as well vote for the one called the Liberal Party.

Flaws: If people do not care about politics they can not expect decent politicians or politics.

These characteristics underlie the decisions to vote for the Liberal Party are really reflections on human beings. Liberal logic and games appeals to certain types of people who are of the nature outlined above. They range from genuinely good and caring people who vote Liberal out of habit, susceptibility to fear, bad union experiences, moral disgust or indifference through to rotten sods who want to maximise their own position irrespective of who they destroy along the way. The Liberal Party attracts all sorts but only benefits a small number of the people who vote for them through short term perks and policy and attitudes aimed at the top end of town.

What is sad about the reflections here of the types of Liberal voters is that few will ever change their position. Every event they see reinforces their prior world view, which tends to be based on limited experience and consideration. Of course, that argument could be equally levelled at me, but I argue that there have been some policies from the Liberal governments over the years with which I have agreed (GST, gun control).

Overwhelmingly the Liberal Party does things that are detrimental to society and the average person, but convincing the average person of this is exceedingly difficult. I go forth with the hope that some of the staunch Liberal supporters I am around will see the light, but also with the realistic thought that they will remain blinded.

# posted by Stuart Anthony Fenech : 20:58  0 comments

Simon Crean was the leader of the Australian Labor Party (ALP) from after the November 2001 federal election until he resigned in December 2003, which led to Mark Latham's rising. Crean was given a rough time while leader and the era was not a very successful one for the ALP.

The most important thing that must be said about Simon Crean is that he is a top person. Simon is the son of Frank Crean, who was a minister in the Whitlam government in the early 1970's. It is clear from Simon's speeches that he is a man who knows what he was talking about and believes in the Labor Party. The words in Simon Crean's speeches reek of class. Below are some lines for a speech made to US President George Bush:

Of course, on occasions, friends disagree, as we on this side did with you on the war in Iraq. But, such is the strength of our shared values, interests and principles, those differences can enrich rather than diminish, strengthen rather than weaken, our partnership. Our commitment to the Alliance remains unshakeable, as does our commitment to the War on Terror, but friends must be honest with each other. Honesty is, after all, the foundation stone of that great Australian value –‘mateship'.

Among the speeches filled with superfluous undertones and irrelevant ambiguus references that day of Bush's visit, Crean's excellent speech stood out. There are many brilliant speeches in Simon Crean's repertoire that can be found on the ALP Internet site. The problem with this speech, as with all speeches made by Crean, is that his strength of personal character was not matched by his speech manner. In other words, he bored people when he spoke, to the point where most people could not pay attention for long enough to hear what he was saying. It pains me to mention this, having read many of Simon Crean's writings and having a lot of respect for the man, but it is true. You can have the best man in the world but without being able to show passion, determination and character when speaking in public, they are unlikely to succeed in politics.

The lack of being able to come across strongly to the general public would lead to Simon's demise as leader. The way Simon took this turn of events was another credit to the integrity of a top man. Fighting back tears, below are some words from his speech announcing his resignation as leader:

It's been a pretty sleepless night, but when I got up this morning I decided to call a ballot for the leadership of the Parliamentary Labor Party at next Tuesday's Caucus meeting and I won't be a candidate for the leadership... Time is running out if we are going to save egalitarianism, compassion and the fair go in this country. Our opponents have set themselves on a course to change this nation for the worse and we mustn't make it easier for them... Time will heal, in my view any personal hurt, this hurt that comes from events like today. I accept that people have behaved according to what they think are the best interests of our Party and our movement. No one, no one, will be happier than me when my successor as Leader becomes Prime Minister next year. It's what Australia needs and it's what I'm going to back. Thank you.

Simon knew his time was up as leader and backed down with style and grace. He knows that the defeat of John Howard's Coalition is far more important than his personal ambition. Since Simon resigned, the man Simon backed for his successor, Mark Latham, has been doing an excellent job as ALP leader.

Mark's success is to a large extent because he has a great foundation to work with left from Simon Crean. Contrary to appearances, there has been very little in the way of policy since Mark took over the leadership. The good policy that Mark has been running with was mostly developed under the leadership of Simon. I suspect that Simon will never get the full credit for the good policy developed while he was the leader. Mark has been able to take the great policy developed previously and get it in to the media, in to the public debate and win people in a way that Simon could not achieve. This is a credit to Mark's superior social skills and raw ability to combine intelligence with the common touch.

Simon Crean was a better leader of the Labor Party than he was perceived. Simon is now the shadow treasurer under Mark Latham and may be the treasurer after the federal election later in the year. It is a great thing that Simon is still active in the Labor Party because individuals with his integrity and strength of personal character are a rare find. It is in the best interests of Australian that Simon continue to be an integral part of the Australian political landscape.

# posted by Stuart Anthony Fenech : 21:04  0 comments

As a teenager you look up to older people and often you get the feeling that they are "old and boring". Funnily enough, as you get older, you become wholeheartedly as old and boring as those people you are implicitly mocking. This writing is about the process whereby people turn from being fun, entertaining, cocky winners to old, boring, conservative, subdued losers. It is without much joy that I report my own degeneration into a somewhat boring conservative person into this class of people who excites me little more than toilet tennis (do not ask). I push to get away with as much as I can in terms of different behaviour, but it is always a fine line and one that I regularly break and suffer for my grievous error.

This is far more than a personal tale of becoming old and boring. It is the tale of how every single one of you out there is destined to become conservative and boring. Of course, some of you will become more utterly boring than others, but you are all heading towards the game great boring location of life. This is a tale of horror for every young person who thinks that they are bound to be an individual.

You Have To Be Nice To Progress

No matter what you want in life, you have to be nice to other people to get it. You can not just be honest and forthright with people, or you will inevitably annoy certain people that you need to be your friends to progress. This is particularly relevant in the work place but also of relevance with extended family, friends, and other groups of people with which you have to deal.

Partners

As you get older, people get partners. Often these partners are detached from your group and your norms. Quite often these partners can be quite temperamental and easily upset, which is naturally what happens. Loyalty changes over time and often people end up being more loyal to their partner than their friends, which is really to be expected. The problem there is that you can not get too off side with the partner or you could lose a good friend. So you tell white lies, avoid certain conversations and head towards being exceptionally boring.

Stubbornness

The more people see of the world, the more they tend to think that they know everything. At high school you like to think you know everything, but deep down most of us know that we really do not know everything. The difference between teenagers and people who like to think they are adults is that the adults are a lot more set in their ways. You can not teach an old dog new tricks if they are convinced there are no new tricks to learn. It gets to a point where you just can not question certain people's world view anymore because they have happily cut themselves off from the real world.

Perceived Maturity

As people get older they like to be perceived as mature, for the benefit of credit from friends, family, work colleagues and the world in general. To accomplish this, certain previously common topics such as sex, relationships, silliness and general fun are replaced by topics like travel, wine preferences or maybe the latest gossip about who has got married or has had a child. The conversation goes from risqué to sleep inducing. Sometimes this is because you do not want people around you on the train to be disturbed, sometimes it's because you do not want to offend but usually it's because in the race to become mature people become boring.

Group Think

At any age group people have a strong desire to be part of the group. This gets stronger as people get older and means that people become very comfortable with the status quo and lose any inkling towards being adventurous. To do something new, different or exciting would be to risk ones position in the comfortably status quo and hence is not to be attempted. Welcome to adult group think, just as pathetic as teenage group think except less obvious.

Thus the story concludes. If you want to have friends, family and a career, you will by necessity become rather boring as you get older. You can fight for all you want and remain less conservative and boring than most in your group, but you will still become more boring than you are now.

Cheers and enjoy your gradual decline!

# posted by Stuart Anthony Fenech : 21:03  0 comments

"On my fifth visit [to Israel] in June 1976 Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin, in the presence, but not, it seemed to me, with the approval, of Shimon Peres, vouchsafed the opinion to me that Israel did not have to consider public opinion in any country other than the US, which had to support Israel in any case."

- Edward Gough Whitlam, former Australian Labor Prime Minister, in "The Whitlam Government 1972-1975"

George Walker Bush was always very confident when he told the world that the reason why terrorists were attacking America was because they "hated our freedom". That resolved it for me, I never for one second thought "why on earth would someone happily living in oppression, as would be the logical conclusion, want to attack America?". Clearly, there are little solutions to oppression than making the free choice to blow up people who have freedom. Rather than continue to mock trivial political rhetoric, I am going to write about something that has a lot more to do with terrorism than any rubbish fed to us by "leaders" like George Bush, Anthony Blair and John Howard. It is called the actions of a little "friend" of ours called Israel.

Our friend Israel likes UN resolutions little more than our 1980's friend Saddam Hussein, who, as you may have noted, is no longer our friend. Israel is a majority Jewish populated country that includes an area called the West Bank which contains mainly Palestinians (Muslims). Israel is not in much of a hurry to grant the Palestinian state settled in UN resolutions. Any search on the Internet can find the masses of UN resolutions that Israel under the leadership of our conservative friend Ariel Sharon is violating. UN resolutions even assert that there should be a Palestinian state, where all of the Palestinian people can live. However, our Israeli friends are not in a hurry to fulfil these resolutions.

The reason Israel is not in any hurry to do what the world believes it should do is because Israel does not have to listen to the world. The reason it does not have to listen to the world is because it's closest buddy in the world is a country called America. You might have heard of America before, we like America because they are our friends too. America is the most powerful country in the world, and when you are, like Israel, good chums with the most powerful country in the world, you can basically do whatever you want. Israel exists disregarding the UN because it's friend, America, is way to powerful for anyone to teach Israel a bit of respect.

Of course, Ariel Sharon and his mates claim that they do what they do because of these nasty Palestinian "terrorists" who keep being very mean. Of course the Israeli military is justified in killing Palestinians, because they are big mean terrorists who blow stuff up. Revenge on an escalating is always justified because they are them and we are us, you know. This is the tried and true thought process of an utter moron, determined to show how much of a big man they are but having absolutely no understanding of human nature.

Forget everything you have ever heard from anyone about the Israeli/Palestine conflict, the truth is rotten but fairly simply. It is all about power and politics. Israel has far more power than the Palestinians because they are chummy with America, the most powerful country in the world. In turn, Israel uses this power to take out actions that otherwise would have Israel wiped off the face of the planet. Israel defies the UN, defies common sense, and defies any sense of looking for long term peace out of a hostile situation. Ariel Sharon knows the political benefits of war a little bit too well.

America has to offer blind support to Israel for two distinct reasons. The first is the powerful Jewish lobby, who put a lot of pressure on governments to support Israel. The Jewish lobby does a beautiful job of confusing disagreement with the actions of Israel and anti-Semitism (hatred of Jews). The second is the extreme religious right in American society, another powerful fringe element. Many religious groups believe in the apocalyptic view of the world, which involves a big world war centred around Israel leading to the second coming of Christ. This is fine, but extremely worried when people who want the second coming of Christ have political power. There is a belief among many in America that "what Israel wants is what God wants". These two powerful and influential elements of American society royally damage rational and reasonably relations with the country of Israel.

The influence of the Israel/Palestinian situation on world events is incredible. Despite the previously mentioned 'hate our freedom' mantra George Walker Bush likes, the situation with Israel is what annoys the Muslim world about America. This is the truth. If you do not believe me, go and ask some people who happen to be Islamic, travel to an Islamic country, anything. This ridiculous system whereby Israel does what it wants because it is friends with America angers millions of people around the world. Without a doubt, without the popular hatred of America's involvement in Israel, the September 11 attacks would not have happened.

The western world fails to realise exactly how angry the Muslim world is about Israel. Of course, being angry about Israel does not mean that people who are Muslim naturally become extremists and terrorists. If that was the case, then with over 200,000 Muslims in Australia (1996), there should be a lot more explosions around the place. It is a fact, however, that the Israel situation does play a role in the lives of those people who are terrorists, and anger of the Israel situation is how terrorist organisations attempt to gain popular Muslim support.

If George Walker Bush and friends expect to stop terrorism, then stopping their blind support if Israel would be a great place to start. Cosy political relationships mean that it will not happen, but it is what needs to happen for peace. America must remove all aid from Israel until it creates the Palestinian state that should have already been created under the UN resolutions. This will not only be a major step towards lasting peace in Israel/Palestine, but also weaken terrorist organisations substantially. How can terrorists possibly gain popular support when the main popular vice with America, Israel, is removed?

In the mean time, the Palestinians will continue to attack the Israelis, the Israelis will continue to attack the Palestinians, a lot of innocent people die and the game continues. There is no 'us' and 'them' in the Israel situation, just a heap of idiots functioning as little more than political pawns for those either wanting to retain or expand their power base. Just because we are friends with Israel does not make them angels. The Israelis and Palestinians are absolutely no better than each other, they simply have different murder techniques.

# posted by Stuart Anthony Fenech : 21:00  0 comments