Re: Howard and the war

[Gary MacLennan <g.maclennan@xxxxxxxxxx>]

At 03:51 PM 4/06/2003 +1200, Phil wrote:
> on the news here last night it mentioned that Howard was riding a
> wave of support, coming off the war and had decided to stay on as
> Liberal Party leader.
>
> Given the huge size of the antiwar demos in Australia in February -
> around one in 19 or one in 20 Aussies taking to the streets - I found it
> rather odd that Howard's popularity had increased.  On the other hand,
> the relatively quick nature of the conventional war and the lack of mass
> civilian casualties, may mean he has been able to strengthen his
> position.  Is this what has happened?

Actually the latest polls show a dip in Howard's leadership.  The Labor
Party in 49% and the Govt 51%.  It is because of the dip that Howard has
decided to stay on.  The Tories believe he cannot be beaten.  The Labor
Leader currently has an approval rating of 19% so they are probably correct.

What is at work in the case of the Howard Government is the phenomenon Tom
and I commented on before.  Howard is extremely unpopular in between
electoral victories.

Why does he keep winning?  Well the Labor Party has a strategy of
"making  itself a small target".  That is it does not come up with policies
because these can be attacked. Well that's what they say publicly.  In
reality they have no policies.

It is this convergence of the two major parties on the terrain of economic
rationalism that has produced the massive apathy that is gripping
Australia.  The brief flare up o anti-war and then the  pro-soldier
sentiment caused ripples on the surface of this apathy, but now that it is
over we are sinking back into the morass of hopelessness.

Hope and Desire are withering and that is always good for conservatives
like Howard.

Howard's special skill is also his capacity to divide Australians.  I 'll
give two examples.  His recent proposed changes to education would take
tertiary education out of the reach of the lower m/class and the working
class.  He is also ending free Medicare (Bulk building by doctors where the
patient pays the doctor nothing).

In the case of education Howard went on talk back radio and talked of the
705 who never got to university and the privileged 305 who complained.
similarly when the Public Broadcaster the ABC decided to drop its digital
channels because of lack of government support, government stooges went on
the attack about the high salary of an ABC star - Indira Naidoo.

In both instances the people was to popular ressentiment against the tall
poppies.  It was of course unprincipled and opportunistic for a Tory PM to
complain about privilege, but then that is the style of the Howard Govt -
faux populism.  It feeds on misery and ignorance and does very well thank you.


> What do you think the public response in Australia is likely to be to
> the continuing inability of the 'Allies' to find any WMDs?  Will Howard
> be able to ride this out?  Is the Australian government under any
> serious political pressure about the non-appearance of WMDs?


This is a hard one.  I notice here that Beasely the former Labor Leader who
is once again challenging for the job, is worried that the WMP affair could
turn out to be anti-American.  He specifically warned his colleagues
against this.

Beasely is actually the most pro-American of Labor leaders.  So it looks as
if he thinks there might be something in the WMD affair.

regards

Gary