Skip navigation

Tag Archives: Dog Whistle

Andrew Bolt is an intelligent, sensitive and highly informed
Many of his articles are meticulously researched and rich in detail.

They are also designed to delberately misinform his readers.

It takes an especially perverse mind to devote a career to concealing truth. In this short post I will offer an explanation as to why Mr. Bolt is so dedicated to misinforming his readership.

In my view there are three motivating forces behind Bolt’s systematic and deliberate dedication to obscuring truth:

1) His dedication to a higher cause, namely the protection
of decent society from the Green movement, which Bolt believes wishes to enact a totalitarian Communist anti-human One World Government

2) His assimilation and adoption of systematic deception and
propagandist techniques
learnt while an employee of Graham Richardson
in the infamous ANiMaLs section of the ALP.

3) His personal emotional and psychological history as a victim
of bullying.

Bolt The Animal.

As is now more widely known, Bolt had two periods of employment working for the ALP including the infamous aNiMalS or National Media Liason Unit, sometimes described as the ALP’s ‘fearsome attack machine’.

It was during those engagements Bolt was first exposed to – and soon intoxicated by – the journalistic dirty tricks, disinformation and propaganga tactics employed by professional political parties.

Bolt immensely enjoyed these jobs working inside the soulless ‘whatever it takes’ political machine created by Graham Richardson and has ever since dedicated his own efforts as Richardson did, to the achievement of political goals irrespective of truth.

Revealingly, Bolt describes an emotional satisfaction and moral justification in defeating one’s enemies through lies and distortion.

Says Bolt:

“It was just really intoxicating and it was the first time I got that real buzz you get from politics which is really dangerous.

You know, that space where you’re so convinced that your side is right and
in those conditions the other side is immoral and therefore you’re excused
all sorts of things.

You start thinking:
“they’re immoral so why should you be nice to them? Why should you follow all the rules?’’’


Because Bolt has a personal and moral commitment to distortion, because Bolt’s primary mode of opertion is to distort the arguments of his opponents, then naturally he sees distortion (a.k.a. ‘spin’ in the propaganda/marketing
speak of the well trained aNiMaL) in all the utterances of his opponents.

A search for the word ‘spin’ on Bolt’s own Herald-Sun Blog finds many hits, not merely in the copy of his Blog posts but in the very titles. Spin is constantly uppermost in Bolt’s mind; he therefore decorates his Blog journalism with the name of his god.


Calculating ABC spin May 22, 2008…/calculating_abc_spin

How the Age drowned its readers in spin…/index…/how_the_age_drowned_its_readers_in_spin/

G20 spin unspun 31 Mar 2009…/g20_spin_unspun/

Big boat comes in to spoil Gillard’s spin 20 Jul 2010 ……/big_boat_comes_in_to_spoil_gillards_spin/

Spin overboard 21 Oct 2009…/spin_overboard1/

How will Garrett spin this? 4 May 2009…/how_will_garrett_spin_this/

The lie in Gillard’s population spin 23 Jul 2010…/column3/

Smith demands better spin doctors to hide the kind of damage he’s …17 Apr 2011…/smith_demands_more_spin_merchants_to_clean_up_his_mess

Tanner unleashes on Gillard and Rudd’s spin .24 Apr 2011…php/…/tanner_unleashes_on_gillard_and_rudds_spin/

The essence of spin 30 May 2008…/the_essence_of_spin/

Tanner spins Labor’s obsession with spin May 2011…/tanner_spins_labors_obsession_with_spin

Rudd gets 1000 to help him spin Feb 2008…php/…/rudd_gets_1000_to_help_him_spin/

Rudd’s spin unspun…/rudds_spin_unspun/

Another leak exposes Gillard’s spin 2 Aug 2010…php/…/another_leak_exposes_gillards_spin/

So much spin 21 Mar 2011 .…/so_much_spin

Rudd spin makes Ferguson ill…/rudd_spin_makes_ferguson_throw_up/

Ellis on Gillard’s cold spin 19 Dec 2010…/index…/ellis_on_gillards_cold_spin/

How Rudd’s spiders spin 17 May 2008…/how_rudds_spiders_spin/

Rudd can’t say “billion”, Oakes can’t say “spin” 30 May 2009…/index…/rudd_cant_say_billion_oakes_cant_say_spin/

New spin needed…/new_spin_needed/

Let the part tell the whole. Spin is an instrinsic and instinctive part of Bolt’s thinking and modus operandi; He is continuously producing it, continuously ascribing it to his opponents and continuously genuflecting to it in his Blog Post titles. Spin simply pours out of Bolt.

As a wise man once said “From the overflow of his heart, so a man speaks”;
or more prosiacally “The fox detects his own stink first”.

Bolt’s treasure is spin. His mind and heart therefore continually attend it.

Higher Truth

Bolt is a moral man. His dedication to distortion is justified because it serves a higher truth; namely the salavation of Australia from TEH LEFT and most particularly The Greens.

Bolt is an Independent Advisor to the hilariously misnamed “Galileo Movement”, an AGW denialist group whose patron is the spittle-flecked Alan Jones.

The Galileo Movement’s semi-rational manifesto has five planks of which four (by discarding ‘protect the environment’) can be taken seriously and two of which reveal the slightly nutty character of the typical One World Government conspiracist.

These latter two are:

– Protect freedom – personal choice and national sovereignty;
– Protect people’s emotional health by ending Government and activists’ constant destructive bombardment of fear and guilt on our kids and communities.

The reference to ‘national sovereignty’ is a dog-whistle for ‘escape the clutches of the evil United Nations and IPCC’ while the second is the polemical paranoic utterance of persons too much acquainted with Ayn Rand and Frederick Hayek, where dwell the modern under-read Libertarians, Cold War dinosaurs and careerist, knee-jerk reactionary anti-Leftists (Bolt is in this category) for which revilement of TEH LEFT and GREENS is as merely automatic and as reasoned as the tribal hatreds bedevilling suburban football fans.

A quick Google for ‘Fear Guilt Left’ on Bolt’s Blog easily shows how Bolt shares with the Galileo Movement the nuttiest fifth plank of its manifesto, while reading his posts on The Greens (e.g the Hamilton one below) soon show that he considers them innately totalitarian in agreement with the polemic associated with the Galileo Movement’s first plank.

The posts also contain elucidations of various other anti-left/Green memes including

– How the Left (surely typified by the Greens) encourage disprespect for
institutions and engender societal sickness and therefore violence and thus are
seeking its ultimate collapse (in order to institute a totalitarian
Communist Green dictatorship);
– Are rampantly hypocritical and morally sick.
– Are Anti-Human
– Poison the minds of children

Here’s “Fear Guilt Left” from Bolt’s Blog

Hamilton stands for Greens – and for fear and less democracy …23 Oct 2009 .…/hamilton_stands_for_the_grees_and_for_fear_and_less_democracy/

Attacking what they no longer respect or fear 14 Feb 2011…/attacking_what_they_no_longer_respect_or_fear

The Left vs Israel 9 Aug 2006 ..…/the_left_vs_israel

The ABC of spreading baseless fear 4 Aug 2008…of…fear/…/P20/

Better left unsaid | 12 Aug 2009 .…better_left…/P20/

This “good” racism of the Left is killing black children .9 Nov 2010

Bullies of the Left 3 Sep 2007…of…left/asc/P20/

Save the planet! Hurt people! 14 Mar 2009…/save_the_planet_hurt_people

Earth Hour bores 28 Mar 2010 … Messing with children’s minds
by installing a sense of guilt and fear over …. From…/earth_hour_bores

This is the real Australia 1 Jul 2011 … As someone so aptly said today,
‘white guilt is heroin for the left’.…/this_is_the_real_australia

Why David Marr dances 9 Nov 2010 …
Guilt and fear were instilled in young people from an early age. … Marr is an act, this ultra left, ultra permissive, contrarian view on every ……/why_david_marr_dances/

Arnie gases on about “sexy” greens 13 Apr 2007 …
You know the kind of guilt I’m talking about: Smokestacks belching pollution and ……php/…/arnie_gases_on_about_sexy_greens/

This is why Bolt has no compunction about misrepresenting his enemies. Bolt’s enemies are evil. They do not deserve truth or fair play. They deserve only defeat and preferably destruction.

To reprise Bolt’s own words about his experience as a political apparatchik:

“You know that space where you’re so convinced that your side is right and
in those conditions the other side is immoral and therefore you’re excused
all sorts of things.”

Bolt joyously inhabits that dangerous space. In fact, the article in which he made those statements is, in my view, a confessional. Bolt is telling the world that truth is irrelevant to him because his enemies do not deserve it.

Revenge Of The Nerd.

Bolt has an extremely poor self image and was an outsider at school,
an experience he did not enjoy.

This explains his constant projection of victimhood, his hurt at people
apparently trying to victimize or silence him for no good reason apart from their innate bullying or their own farcical self-confidence at being part of the
brainless clique/mob of conformists/insiders.

Maybe at times Bolt was derided or the victim of name-calling or other anti-social acts directed at he, Bolt, the quiet, shy Dutch boy not fiting in.

Bolt’s first published piece was a poem he wrote at 13 years of age about
his abhorrence at bullies and at becoming a bully himself in order to fit in.

Bolt’s sense of victimhood is eternally fresh. Always present, it has been
conspicuosuly on display somewhat pathetically twice. Once when Bolt asserted
that he was in physical danger of mob violence agitated by an obscure (but brilliant) political blog, and most recently when whinging and moaning at his finding of guilt by the Federal Court of Australia for Racial Discrimination.

David Marr succintly skewers Bolt’s nonsense here. detailing how Bolt simply ignored inconvenient facts while penning the articles which led to his conviction

Robert Manne here notes the side-splitting insanity of Bolt who has a newspaper column and a blog in a wide-circulation national newspaper, his own TV program and a regular Melbourne radio slot claiming that his views are muzzled and that being held accountablee for untrue and racially-based slurs is an unfair prohibition on his free speech.

David Penderbethy here describes the embarrassment his colleague, Bolt, embodies to serious journalists and journalism ans also notes the imbecility of Bolt’s claims to be silenced or otherwise victimized.

I see Bolt’s articles and certainly his persona as strongly informed
by those boyhood experiences. The ‘mob’ is transmuted into his poltical enemies, The left/Greens, but now the power relationships are inverted.
Bolt has freedom to excoriate ‘the mob’ protected by the financial resources
of his attack dog newspaper, and as his boyhood poem prophetically stated,
Bolt has become the attack dog and bully himself.

The well-spring of Bolt’s rage, as all emotional hurts are, is inexhaustible.
As an adult Bolt is now able to channel that rage into excoriating the left/Greens dressing it in the fig leaf of moral justification since the Greens themselves are irredeemably evil and therefore deserve it.

Bolt’s articles are the revenge of the hurt boy.

Bolt’s Fundamental Motivation

So, in the end, what motivates Bolt ? To answer to this question I believe one must look to where Bolt expends most energy: Aboriginal Affairs and Climate Change.

Bolt came to prominence as a Poison Pen for the Right on the back of the ‘Stolen Generations’ issue which was the centrepiece of the ‘History Wars’ in Australian Politics from 1996-2007.

Bolt engaged in an extended public debate with one of Australia’s leading public intellectuals, Robert Manne, over the Stolen Generations. The question is why would Bolt bother to expend such energy on this particular issue ? That question has added salience now that Bolt has been found guilty of Racial Discrimination by accusing nine prominent part-Aboriginal Australians of falsely claiming or duplicitously emphasizing their Aboriginal heritage merely for financial benefit. What is it about Aboriginal issues that engages Bolt to such a degree ? Why does this issue in particular motivate him to write with such passion ?

Bolt gave a significant clue in an article of his ‘Why I Wont Change’ which appeared in the Herald-Sun in Feb. 2004.

In the article Bolt cites a plea for help from a Year 12 student seeking accurate information about the Stolen Generations. The student sent Bolt a Stolen Generations ‘Fact Sheet’ supplied by the school which Bolt typifies as full of ‘luxurious falsehoods’ and says:

I admire that girl for already knowing that what matters is that she first be told the truth, before she’s taught what to feel about it. I admire her for demanding the right to exercise her own conscience, rather than mimic her teacher’s. How can we tell lies to such a young woman — however noble our motives — and have such contempt for her perception, her reasoning and her moral sense?

So Bolt claims his motivation is the defence of the minds of Australia’s youth from the fear/guilt propaganda inflicted on them by TEH LEFT via the education system. i.e. Bolt is standing up for the fifth plank of the Galileo Movement manifesto:

Protect people’s emotional health by ending Government and activists’ constant destructive bombardment of fear and guilt on our kids and communities


For Bolt, the Stolen Generations history is a myth invented by the Left to poison the minds of children, presumably to engender mistrust in our institutions in order to foment leftist revolution.

Ironically, of course, the Stolen Generations is a true history; but like former Prime Minister John Howard, Bolt prefers the received myth of Australia’s white settlement, that it was concluded largely without violence and without racism expect for some limited and unfortunate mistakes made only in the best interests of Aboriginal persons by those trying their best at the time.

Bolt styles himself as a truth crusader. On Aboriginal issues, however, he is in reality a myth crusader. His recent conviction for Racial Discrimination has bought out that Bolt ignored facts inconvenient to him when compiling his dossier on prominent Australian ‘false Aboriginals’. His previous conviction, for Defamation in 2002 also showed that Bolt ignored facts known to him when writing an article containing defamatory untruths regarding Magistrate Jelena Popovic. Simply, Bolt prefers myth to fact and falsehood to truth as he serves his Higher Truth.

As Emile Durkheim noted, the function of myth is to validate, explain and preserve an established belief or authority system.

The question then becomes ‘what Higher Truth is Bolt serving’.

I submit that Bolt’s Higher Truth is the salvation of Australia from Leftists and Greens. The battle is fought on ideas. Therefore no Leftist idea, Stolen Generations or otherwise, must be allowed to survive. Leftists ideas must be defeated and, as Bolt learned as an aNiMaL, truth is the first casualty of this war. Lies must be mobilized to preserve truth. The minds of Australian youth must be fortified with good Right-wing lies in order that evil left-wing lies be defeated.

In short Bolt has adapted a Vietnam War dictum: The minds of Australians must be destroyed in order to save them.

The Utility Of Andrew Bolt

Bolt is allowed his privileged safe haven at the Herald-Sun because he serves the interests of power. His strident and duplicitous vocalisation of anti-Left, anti-Green propaganda buttressed by his sneakily adduced statistics provides a superficially authoritative denunciation of the Left/Green perspective.

Bolt’s passionate advocacy provides a pseudo-intellectual justification for the rejection of progressive reforms and entrenchment of the privileged status quo.

Bolt is a useful tool for entrenched privilege. So the Herald-Sun is prepared to pay well to keep Bolt’s megaphone open. Which is why the Herald-Sun is gritting its wallet to pay Bolt’s legal fees and keep Bolt’s misogynistic, homophobic, counter-factual and anti-scientific diatribe page open…for business.

Watched ABC’s Q&A the other night 19-Apr-2010, Premiers, Population And The Politics Of Fear and got my first good look at Scott Morrison, Coalition Shadow Minister for Immigration and Citizenship.

He’s confident, polite, articulate and a complete sleaze bag.

Morrison’s willingness to inflame xenophobic sentiment on boat people Asylum seekers proves that the Liberal-National Party Coalition still has Simple Minds on the issue of Immigration, in the most evil sense of the phrase.

Scotty’s (and Tony’s) Dog Whistle

Scotty’s Dog Whistle on Q&A was ‘put migration last’. Here it is:

SCOTT MORRISON: At the end of the day migration is the question that you answer right at the end of the process,

The AlanJonesAPhiles in the electorate understand this language immediately. It means ‘we don’t want don’t trust don’t need don’t care about don’t give a tinker’s curse about boat people go away go away now fast you yer mates and the UN can just go and get stuffed’

Now, you can’t say that sort of thing directly in a civilised nation, so you have to preface the whole thing in an acceptable-face-of-evil sort of way by couching it in noble sentiment. Here’s Scotty being calm and reasonable about the whole thing:

we are currently growing at a rate of net overseas migration of, on average over the last seven quarters, of 300,000 per year… what this debate, I think, is really all about is about strained cities, about water resources, about energy supplies into the future, and all of these types of things.

So, Scotty tells us migration is killing the environment, so its not that we don’t like xenos, no, we LOVE Tamils, Afghans, Hashemites, Vegemites and Amelikites, its just that they’re killing our cities, drinking all the flamin’ water and overcrowding the public transport. So if they could rack off back to whever they come from we would all be mightily pleased just be reasonable…its nothing personal, its about our very personal survival, not yours

…which is why Australia needs to put migration last, or to quote Scotty

migration is the question that you answer right at the end of the process

Now, Scotty started all calm and reasonable just tootling on his Dog Whistle like a good ‘ol boy, but was then directly called out as a xenophobe by member of the audience who asked

JOY GOODSELL: My question is to Scott Morrison. …I was wondering why you can’t behave like Bruce Baird did when he was acting for refugees, instead of stirring the racist pot that you’ve been doing over the past few weeks?

Onya Joy.

So Scotty puts the Dog Whistle away and comes back with more like a Dog Bagpipes and starts spraying the Howardisms thick and fetid.

He calls the Boat People ‘illegals’…

I want to stand up for people who are sitting in camps all around the world whose places are denied by those who choose come by an illegal method.

…notice again trying to couch his stink in a noble cause.

He calls them wilfull destroyers of documents:

those who have wilfully gotten rid of their documentation…they come here dispense with their documentation

(of course acknowledging that some have their documentation destroyed by no fault of their own).

He says we are in danger from a flood of refugees:

There are 10 and a half million refugees in the world today… Where do we stop?

And finally – we should be grateful for this – flat out says he doesn’t support ANYONE coming to Australia by boat.

SIMON SHEIKH: But the truth of what you said there earlier tonight is that you don’t support people who come by boat.

SCOTT MORRISON: No, I don’t…there are 10 and a half million of them… last time we were in government it worked. We reduced the boats to zero and they stopped coming. We make no apology for it.

No Boats. Its what the Coalition thinks the people of Australia want. Its the goal Abbott and Morrison in their tiny, diminished hearts stand for.

But they cannot achieve it, setting aside for the moment the infantile banality of such a xenophobic and mean spirited policy objective, Yes, in 2002, zero boats arrived, but that was due to Australia’s immigration zones being redefined under the infamous Pacific Solution (the boats still came) and also this does not account for many months when Refugees arrived by boat in much the same numbers at present under Howard’s watch

Rudd’s figures on boat arrivals correlate the same way as Howard’s do: to external factors, i.e. overseas war. Which is the raison d’etre for the UN Convention On Refugees

But counting of boat numbers misses the point at so many levels. It makes me queasy to think that the alternative government of a prosperous Liberal Democracy like Australia can imagine pride in refusing refugees of war; worse turns them into cheap political capital.

The huge majority of refugees under Howard were found to be a legitimate refugee (97% Iraqis, 93% Iranians, 84% all asylum seekers) under the relevant UN Convention which has its genesis in the experience of Jews fleeing Nazi Germany. None were found to be terrorists.

Morrison should feel pride that Australia is a signatory to that noble agreement instead of couching his dead lies in the faux nobility of the whitewshed tombs (Population Policy, UN certification, respect for documentation) he recycles for his sleazy purposes.

Dog Whistle Of The Century

Dog Whistle Of The Century

The Daily Telegraph has brilliantly employed juxaposition of text and image on its front cover 29-May-2009 to Dog Whistle to the fear and paranoia of Muslims and Islam felt by many of the ‘Howard Battlers’ or ‘working families’ of Sydney.

The cover is completely filled with a picture of one of Skaf brothers (notorious young Lebanese Muslim rapists) being visited by his parents in jail. Skaf and his mother occupy most of the shot. Skaf has his arm and hand extended towards his mother palm-up and is holding something indistinguishable. The text reads (to paraphrase) ‘How did the evil Skaf brothers get a mobile phone in jail ?’

The answer, supplied by the highly suggestive picture is that his mother smuggled it in under her Islamic garb in which she is dressed. Here’s the story from the on-line edition.

Islamophobic fear, for which female Islamic attire is a lightning rod, is thus aroused by the implication that a MUSLIM RAPIST has received COVERT SUPPORT from an ISLAMIC woman DECEITFULLY using HIJAB to CONCEAL CONTRABAND.

The sub-texts:
– They can’t be trusted.
– They are not repentant.
– SHE COULD HAVE A BOMB just as easily as a phone.

The sales strategy of the Daily Telegraph is to reflect, reinforce and justify prejudice (and supply the racing form guide). The May 29 issue is a surpassing example.

Whatever Skaf’s crimes I find it entirely understandable that his mother should wish to be able to speak to him and, notwithstanding the repulsive nature of Skaf’s crimes, it is understandable he wishes to speak with her. But its jail. He can’t have a mobile phone.

The Daily Telegraph does not explore this human angle on the story, but instead bashes on relentlessly in its supporting article about Law And Order issues, content to let its cover Dog Whistle the rest.

Which it does brilliantly for the coffers of the Telegraph, for the xenophobia of its readership and to the general poisoning of the mass culture.

The Coalition just can’t help itself, and why should it ? A good dogwhistle to the heaving sea of xenophobic paranoia lodged in this nation’s 45-75 yrs demographic and mostly glued to Sydney talkback radio throughout electorally crucial slabs of Sydney’s metropolitan area is still worth a seat or five.

That’s why Joe Hockey and Sharman Stone (Shadow minister for Immigration and Citizenship) have both nonchalantly dropped the aside in recent times that yellow scum China will end up holding a fair share of Australia’s debt over the next decade.

First was Ms. Stone, staining an otherwise classy performance on ABC’s Q&A of May 7th ‘Taxes, Torture and The Taliban’ by observing that we’re accumulating debt at a rate of a couple of billion dollars a week, all borrowed mostly from China. From the transcript:

SHARMAN STONE: … we’ve got a long way to go and we’re accumulating debt at a rate of a couple of billion dollars a week, all borrowed mostly from China; borrowed for the future generation to have to pay back. Now, you can’t generate jobs…

TONY JONES: Is it bad to borrow from China, by the way, the way you said that – I’m just wondering?

SHARMAN STONE: I beg your pardon?

TONY JONES: Is it particularly bad to borrow from China?


GREG SHERIDAN: It’s bad for China.

SHARMAN STONE: It’s bad for a government to borrow money to throw into individual’s pockets at $900 [rabbits on dodging Jones’ question.]

This was followed up by Joe Hockey on the following week’s Q&A, ‘Budget Special From Canberra’, in which Hockey foreshadowed Coaltion plans for a publicly-accessible register of government borrowings.

JOE HOCKEY: …we’re going to move an amendment in the senate at the first available opportunity, to make sure there is a proper disclosure about who we are borrowing from because we’re borrowing on a scale that we’ve never done before…

Jones immediately identified the Dog Whistle…

TONY JONES: What is it you’re worried about, though? Are you worried that we’re borrowing from China? Are you worried we’re borrowing from the Middle East?

Hockey confirmed he’s up for a bit of Yellow Peril scaremongering:

JOE HOCKEY: Well, China…

TONY JONES: Which countries are you actually worried about?

JOE HOCKEY: I think it’s important to know where we are borrowing from because ultimately you take the government of China. If the government of China is now the biggest single lender to the Australian government, the Australian people should know it.

The Return Of FrankenHoward

I find it disturbing that the Coaliton is still willing to fan the flames of Xenophobia in this country.

Having been though the extremely distasteful Howard years in which Hanson’s xenphobia was not criticised until her votes returned to the Coalition, One Nation supporters were mollycoddled and wooed, in which the existence and experiences of the Stolen Generation was denied and Aboriginal entitlements portrayed as a fraudulent and bogus ‘industry’, in which the provocations to racially-motivated thuggery of Alan Jones were defended and the thugs themselves sympathized with and in which refugees fleeing war and persecution were portayed as villanous, deceitful dole-bludgers, it is incredible that the Coalition still wishes to plumb these skanky depths.

It is as if the undead Howard-Coalition cadaver of 2007 has risen again, unable to lie still through the sheer intensity of xenophobic poison Howard injected into it over the period of his leadership.

I suspect this is one of the reasons that Dame Elisabeth Murdoch says that Howard has destroyed the Liberal Party. Here’s what she told The Age

I’m very critical of John Howard. He wrecked the party and himself. He just couldn’t let go and I think he believed he could win, but he was completely out of touch. I blame Janette. I think she’s very ambitious.”

I agree with Dame Murdoch. Observing Howard’s Prime Ministership was like watching a man lose his soul in public while enjoying the experience.

Other Legacies Of Howard

Howard purged his party of actual liberals and even conservatives insisting instead on turning the Liberal Party into the political arm of Business-Corporate interests typified by the forces that created the Multilateral Agreement on Investment and attempting to de-legitimize any other viewpoint from the Australian polity.

Electoral support for this horrible vision was gained by pork-barelling the Middle Class and inflaming xenophobic paranoia in the blue-collars and pensioners. Along the way he vandalised the economy by introducing a severe structural deficit into the budget by the aforementioned middle-class welfare and tax cuts. Howard’s budgets and welfare could only be sustained by a permanent commodities boom. Now the hard times are here, the Labor party will once again have to do the work of economic (this time fiscal) reform that Howard could not stomach for the simple interests of getting and maintaining power.

Stumbling Onto A Strategy

The Coalition’s current Yellow Peril dogwhistle appears to have come about from justified concerns about Defence Minister Joel Fitzgibbon’s relationship with Helen Liu who is a roving functionary for the Chinese government.

This thread, More On The Yellow Peril, at Lavartus Prodeo contains that story and the comments make for useful supplementary reading including a suggestion that the Australian right are merely following the American right in smearing China since it constitutes a rival to US Economic/Military hegemony.

Breathing Foul Air

It is disturbing and offensive that the Liberals cannot discipline themselves to refrain from feeding at the trough of xenophobia. It only poisons them and us.