Mark Latham is preferable to Labor

Mark Latham may be rough around the edges but he makes more national interest sense than his old party does, via the ABC:

Former Opposition leader Mark Latham is tossing up a return to politics, but it’s not clear which party would make the best fit for the one-time Labor leader who has since been exiled from the party.

Mr Latham appeared with One Nation leader Pauline Hanson on Sky News last night, but said he was still undecided on whether he would join her party.

“I’ve not made any decision — I do get people urging me, mainly on the basis, they say, that the country’s gone crazy,” he said.

“When you look at the political correctness, the identity politics, the anti-white racism.

“People so often say to me ‘the country’s gone mad. What’s happened? Why has it changed so badly in the last decade. You should get in and do something’.”

Senator Hanson said she would love to have him beside her in Parliament.

“Mark knows that I’d be quite happy to have him on board, but Mark’s his own person,” she said.

“Whether he wants to get involved in politics again, that’s up to Mark.”

Mr Latham has voiced a pre-recorded robocall message for One Nation ahead of the upcoming byelection in Longman, north of Brisbane.

In that message, he warns voters not to trust his former party — a move which came as a surprise to Liberal Democrats Senator David Leyonhjelm.

Mr Latham joined Senator Leyonhjelm’s party last year.

And Senator Leyonhjelm said he had also been in discussions with Mr Latham about a possible comeback over recent weeks.

“He still has to take into account the views of his wife, his kids and whether he actually wants to return to politics,” Senator Leyonhjelm said.

“Going back into politics for the second time is a bit like getting married a second time.

“It’s a triumph of hope over experience.”

Mr Latham led Labor’s unsuccessful election campaign against John Howard in 2004, quit politics the year after and swore he’d had enough of public life.

For its part, the Labor party has already declared it will never take Mr Latham back. It made that announcement after he joined the Liberal Democrats.

Opposition Leader Bill Shorten dismissed Mr Latham’s robocalls as a “sideshow” and a “distraction” from the issues at the heart of upcoming by-elections, and Shadow Treasurer Chris Bowen labelled Mr Latham “a rat”.

“I think the Australian people would see through the charlatan that he is, that he’s become,” Mr Bowen said.

“I say that with no relish. It’s sad to see a former Labor Party leader sink to depths.

“But he’ll go down as one of the great Labor rats of history.”

ALP President Wayne Swan said the idea of Mr Latham making a political return at all was extraordinary.

“He’s been in just about every political party in the history of this country,” Mr Swan said.

“So what we’ll see from Mark Latham and what we’ll see from Pauline Hanson is more of the same — which is kooky extremism.”

Mr Latham told Sky News he now liked the idea of getting several minor parties to band together.

He said that would strengthen democracy by giving them enough clout to properly challenge the Liberals and the ALP.

“Because they’re not doing the job,” he said.

“They’ve lost heaps of support and I’m absolutely convinced that the people are crying out to make Australian politics more competitive.”

Senator Leyonhjelm said he liked that principle, but finding enough common ground to amalgamate with groups like Australian Conservatives or One Nation would be difficult.

I don’t buy the “anti-white racism” line. That’s unnecessarily inflammatory and just a counter-claim to victimhood. So are many of Latham’s antics as he’s deliberately insulted progressives for the past few years in a meteoric media career as the nation’s self-appointed Leftist interlocutor.

But there is a deeper point to make. Latham is exactly right when he attacks identity politics for corrupting the Left’s only reason for being: fighting the class war. This comes to a head most pointedly in Latham’s views on mass immigration. Previously on from a speech at Sustainable Australia:

“I don’t think you need to be John Maynard Keynes to work out that if you lower the demand for housing by cutting the immigration program, you do something to stabilise the price of housing or even bring it down. It’s a simple proposition… Year 11 economics: the first thing they learn about is supply and demand….

What we get in Australia at the moment in the great debate about housing affordability is only half the story. Because just about the entire system… focuses on the supply-side. And there’s a big debate about how we can build more housing… But what about demand? Sydney has 80,000 extra residents per annum. Melbourne has 90,000. And it’s mainly fueled by Australia’s 200,000-plus immigration program each year. And per head of population around the world, we run the biggest immigration program in the West. In the Western World, we have the biggest immigration program per capita.

So wouldn’t it just be plainly logical to put the demand for housing as part of the equation when considering affordability?

So why the cone of silence?… Why doesn’t anyone talk about the common sense in bringing down the biggest immigration program to give some relief on housing prices and relief on home buyers?

Well, it’s a classic case of a convergence of vested interests… You’ve got the two main tribes of left and right agreeing they won’t discuss immigration, they won’t discuss a cut to population as a way of improving housing affordability. And then you’ve got more naked vested interests in the system.

You’ve got the left-wing attachment to open borders… they support Big Australia for that reason.

For the Labor and Liberal parties… a big migration program they weaponise for ethnic branch stacking…

The property and housing industries, of course, they want more people coming in as that’s more money as you build the houses and you develop the property.

Big retailers, they love Big Australia, as they get more people walking through the door to buy their goods – easy money. The financial sector, the home loans… The big advertising industry of course… they make money out of it.

The Department of Treasury in Canberra is very much pro-immigration and a Big Australia… because it’s a good way for Australia to achieve economic growth… Australia’s had 25-years of economic growth. But the truth is, in recent times, Australia’s growth has been sustained by the big immigration program. It hasn’t been sustained by productivity and competitiveness… We sustain our GDP figures artificially. Per head of population we are not going so great… Politicians love the idea of artificially inflating GDP figures, so that also sustains the Big Australia, big immigration program ethos…

So you see right across the political system advocates… Just look at the supply-side of housing, don’t look at the immigration… But in the outer suburbs, all this urban sprawl and congestion has made life dysfunctional in terms of getting around… There’s housing estates popping out of the ground like mushrooms. They’re everywhere. So there’s lots of supply, but it’s not keeping up with the demand. The fact that we are adding 80,000 people to Sydney every year is being driven by immigration… The inner-city Big Australia advocates have no idea about how dysfunction life is becoming in the outer-suburbs… This is a big drain on economic efficiency [as well as] social efficiency…

For people in Western Sydney, quite frankly, you leave home in the dark, you get home in the dark, they don’t see their property in sunlight for most of the year. These traveling times are horrendous. And the supply-side fetish of ‘just build more housing estates’ is making Sydney dysfunctional…

So the more sensible thing to do is find an immigration program for the people who live here… Have a ‘nation-first’ immigration program for the benefit of the residents of Australia. And that program would be defined on a big cut from 200,000-plus to about 50,000 a year… which would be a wonderful stabilising influence on housing prices, stabilise some of the urban sprawl and inefficiency, it’s a logical solution.

But because of all these vested interests – it really is a collaboration – screwing over people in the suburbs, we don’t even hear this part of the political debate, which is a dreadful shame”…

The same arguments apply for wages in reverse of course. Kill the deluge of supply released by the great visa rort to decompress wages. Where’s Labor and the ACTU on this? Tucked up in bed with capital is where.

Latham has always been a radical centrist in the camp of aspirational policy making of free market reform tempered by class consciousness. He’s ocker, certainly, but still socially liberal. He’s a dedicated climate change warrior who supports nuclear over renewables. He’s a defense nationalist with strong Asian engagement values. I’m not sure where he’d stand on China today but I suspect he’d be strongly against its domestic incursions. Cutting immigration is a necessary step in that battle anyway.

None of this deserves the kind of treatment that Labor is dealing out to him just because he called out one of its dirtiest backroom bovver boys in public:

Labor has many worthy policies. It’s attack on the great tax concessions rort is very much welcome. Its corporate tax regime is better than the Coalition’s. It’s tax cuts are far superior (though we shouldn’t have any). So are its climate change policies. But any party led by Mark Latham would carry that kind of policy reform platform as well. And if it added cuts to immigration on top then he’d be a no-brainer pick over Labor.

I suspect that’s why they’re so defensive about it.


  1. He’ll run with ON. Calling it now.

    “I don’t buy the anti-white racism – yeh a simple flick over to ABC, SBS, The Project, The Greens, #Changethedate or Tim Soutphommasane proves that statement ridiculous.

    Now where’s drsmithy with his usual cringe inducing self-flagellation?

    • You being oppressed, mate?

      Meh. The wowsers have run amok. But couching it as “white racism” is simply joining the great victimhood. It’s cooky wowserishness that needs to be wound back not some toxic form ethnic cleansing.

      • Oh hold on to your clear frame glasses. Merely pointing out the double standard. Anti white racism is a real thing and its been ratcheted up the last few years.

        MB’s in no position to take the high ground with their pure white guilt “double the refugee intake” policy.

        You’re the one that’s constantly slamming Dutton for being a “racist”

      • If you trace it back the “double refugee policy” is actually my policy, so don’t blame the MB boys for it.

        Realpolitik means the likely aspersions of racism have to be proactively managed when reducing total might grant intake. Doubling refugee intake is a pragmatic way of doing this.

        I, for one, am also on board with this from a more perspective.

    • Nah. One nation has a racist past (even if was mostly naivety) Latham won’t want that. He has a senate spot waiting for him wherever he goes.

    • HadronCollision

      Spare me your oppression

      I’m a white male and enjoy plenty of privilege but don’t buy this anti white racism palaver. Total. Utter. Bollocks.

      Latham’s undoes a lot of good points with this anti white racism line as HnH properly points out.

      Perhaps your perceived oppression is really just a reflection of the fact society is finally trying to rectify the massive balance in favour of WMP after all these years. GOD FORBID.

      What Gavin said.

      The only real oppression in the world right now is the AFL and their weekly umpiring rules seeking to oppressed the Melbourne Football Club’s march toward the flag. The oppression is clear and undeniable.

      • Nah HadronCollision, I don’t do the whole collective guilt thing, there’s really nothing more pathetic than that. The fact you’ve come straight out justifying racism against white people as some kind of restoring balance is pretty perverse.

        Not claiming oppression at all but Im merely pointing out the double standard that Latham has been accurately referring to these last few years. I don’t see how me or my kids should be singled out for things they have had nothing to do with.

        If you really feel the death of white western society that you benefit from is necessary to expunge some kind of imaginary guilt, then by all means slit your wrists and lead by example. Otherwise it’s just another form of narcissism. I believe EP posted a good video yesterday.

      • And I don’t buy your “white privilege” palaver.
        Studying and working hard, obeying the law, controlling impulses and delaying gratification are not privileges. Just civil behaviour.

      • Brendan O’Neil was spot on with that smug left leaning “I acknowledge my privilege types” they make me want to gag.

      • lolol. love your response.


        Stephen, lololololol. White racism. lolololololol. Whether you like it or not, recognise it or not, you have benefited being a white male in this society. You have also benefited from aboriginal dispossession, doesn’t make you responsible for it, but benefiting from it just the same. Your tears of “white racism” are hugely amusing.

      • HadronCollision

        I get your schtick Stephen and Andrew, I really do.

        Stephen, you said ” The fact you’ve come straight out justifying racism against white people as some kind of restoring balance is pretty perverse.”

        1. I didn’t justify any racism.
        2. Please provide evidence of anti white racism. Some concrete examples would be great. Note: the changethedate movement is not anti white racism. If you believe that then there’s not much I cna do for you in your scared little world.
        3. I don’t feel guilty. I just recognise and acknowledge past and current injustice.

        Jeez you two are a laugh.

      • Jordan Peterson is a clever sounding man who has spent enough time in academia to give the impression of intelligence and wisdom. Upon scrutiny of his original works, which make post modernism read like Bertrand Russell, and his couched and self preservingly vague comments upon broader social topics, it is obvious that his delusions of intellectual grandeur are far greater than his actual ability. But, if you are into virtue signalling and need your safe spaces to and hide in his bossom. For, as Cornershop noted, everybody needs a bossom for a pillow, and it appears that Peterson is currently in vogue.

      • ErmingtonPlumbingMEMBER

        Does this recognising and acknowledging of past injusticies include you giving up any of your assets or your career,…out of reconciliation?,…mmm?
        What about the injustice and discrimination brought against Irish convict slaves and their decendants second class/working class entrapment for generations,…acknowledging that lack of privilage?
        Or does their “Whiteness” automatically make oppressed whites “Privilaged”,…how lucky for them!

        What about African Americans? Aren’t they beneficiaries of Native American dispossession?,…Of colonial white privilage too?? I mean the Average African Americans standard of living is way higher than Native Americans and the People in Africa, on every single standard of living metric,…are they also not beneficiaries of past injustice?,…mmm?
        What about Aboriginal people who live in the large cities, had good educations and have successful careers,….they are much more “privilaged” than the remote area Aborigines that experience the most appalling conditions that exsist in this country!
        Should those City Aborigionals shoulder some of this “White Guilt” to?,…considering many of them have benefited a lot more than other indigenous Australians,…and not mentioning the large percentage that carry “British islands blood”

        Or is it all just a “Hyper Racial” skin colour thing,….sounds pretty fkn racist to me if thats all it is.

      • Footsore; you sound like the type that has skin in the game that is threatened by the likes of Peterson acting to wake up swathes of people regarding the dangers of Post-Modernism, Cultural Marxism and Identity Politics.
        Or you are just plain envious of the man and his meteoric rise in popularity.
        Peterson isn’t perfect but his message is largely on point and resonates.

      • I’m of Welsh/Scottish Australian heritage on my dad’s side, Filipino on my mum’s side. So am I privileged and therefore guilty, or oppressed and therefore a victim? This is all too confusing. I thought we were all individuals.

      • No skin in the game. I’m not an academic and i think that the culture wars is fought by snowflakes on both sides. This blog just seems to attract the flakes from the right.

        Maybe Peterson’s sincere, or maybe he’s spotted a market. Maybe he said something, got a bit if attention and thought, “This is nice.” and tries to stay in the public eye. Maybe it’s a case of an enemy of my enemy is my friend so he’s been picked up as a mouthpiece by those who are unable to articulate their sentiments on the topics. Or maybe it’s that the standard of public discussion has dropped so low that he’s now considered the bee’s knees. Maybe it’s a bit if all the above. I couldn’t tell you.

        Keep questioning what is out there, just please find someone that isn’t so crap. Demand quality. If your sporting team showed up with a guy who was all talk and posing and then couldn’t play you’d be bothered. Well be bothered with Petterson for the same reason.

        If you are interested, this article does a far better job of laying out why he isn’t the messiah than I ever could.

      • Peterson ISN’T the Messiah, nor does he claim to be.
        What he has openly said though is that he has found a way of monetising Social Justice Warriors (and Leftists).
        Good luck to him.
        I am a fan of his work and his message as we are living in a culture that has all but gone into “Full Retard” Leftist mode culturally.

      • @ Footsore. That’s not a bad article to understand the intellectual critique of Peterson, but it remains quite unconvincing. It’s verbose and obscure and sneaky in parts as well. The lobster is the good example:

        “Peterson is at his murkiest when he is talking about nature. Half the time he seems to be committing the naturalistic fallacy: he’ll describe tendencies that exist, and imply that these things are therefore good. So he’ll talk about dominance hierarchies among lobsters, and exhort young men to “Look for your inspiration to the victorious lobster.” Of course, the animal kingdom is also a place of mutual aid, and for a man to emulate a lobster is like a woman treating the existence of the praying mantis as a license to eat her husband.”

        This is just not where Peterson is going with the Lobster example, he is looking at the comparable biochemistry of the synapses and the nervous system to make the observation that humans have a biological response to social hierarchies.

        I’m not sure i’m a Peterson fan either, but to critique him for simplifying the complex ideological views of the left is really to miss the point. That is very much what he is doing, and doing really well. Part of the success of the leftist, postmodern, neomarxist, feminist etc ideologies that all call for the recasting of society in their utopian vision is that they are bullsh*t intellectualism. They are deliberately obscure, deliberately opaque and aimed at intellectual intimidation not intellectual elucidation.

        This is bizarre and arcane academic theory that has started to flow down into peoples lives, into organisational theory, into corporate structuring and change, and they need to make sense of it, they need to know whether the purveyor is smart or just a charlatan because they will never have time to do the work to look behind the complexity of the language. Peterson has stepped up to take on the machine, and he is the first to really do a good job of openin peoples eyes to the bullsh*t.

        In the end maybe this is a good thing, the neomarxist left should be marginal, they can be dangerous and ideological and their faustian pact with the fake neoliberal left has squeezed out the space for a real left in return for a few funding areas to skim.

      • EP,
        I think you’ve been looking down too many S bends.

        “What about African Americans? Aren’t they beneficiaries of Native American dispossession?,…Of colonial white privilage too?”
        Really, you’re really asking that question?? African Americans were slaves, they had no choice on going to America.

        “Does this recognising and acknowledging of past injusticies include you giving up any of your assets or your career,…out of reconciliation?,…mmm?”
        Reconciliation takes place by admitting past wrongs and not denying them like Howard’s assertion of our “black armband view of history”. I’d have thought it involves trying to resolve the destruction of their society through alcohol etc, improving and accepting them. Lastly, your comment on assets etc, that would come via the budget, which it has but less that 20c in the $ makes it to them, most gets chewed up by the WHITE bureaucracy and WHITE business. Drinking piss with some abs isn’t reconciliation, but I expect your one of those types who eats asian food or is married, so therefore can’t be racist or a misogynist.

        The rest of your dribble about urban abs is just strawman crap. lolol, I guess you should recognise that, as you’ve seen enough of it over your career.

      • ErmingtonPlumbingMEMBER

        “Really, you’re really asking that question?? African Americans were slaves, they had no choice on going to America.”

        Im decended from an Irish Convict Slave that “had no choice on going to Australia” in 1816,…a time when only 3% of the “WHITE” British population had the vote.
        I suspect he hated British Colonialism a lot more than most Aboriginals at the time.
        My kids also have an Irish convict slave ancestor on their mothers side, a First fleeter,…also sent here against their will,…as a Slave.
        So what make African Americans exempt from responsibility,…but not my Kids?
        The Colour of their Skin?
        If so,…Fk you,…you Racist Cvnt.

      • drsmithyMEMBER

        LOL. Ermo rolls out a case study in whataboutism.

        With your mastery of fallacy I can see why you like Brendan O’Neil so much.

      • ErmingtonPlumbingMEMBER

        So many people on twitter do exactly the same thing as you Smithy,…a bunch of brief slurs about the man, don’t address what he says at all.

      • drsmithyMEMBER

        So many people on twitter do exactly the same thing as you Smithy,…a bunch of brief slurs about the man, don’t address what he says at all.

        After the display above I don’t think you’re in any position to get high and mighty about ‘not addressing what he says’.

        Who is the “man” in this context anyway ? Latham or O’Neill ?

        I’ve addressed what they’re saying enough in the past to know it’s not changing much. I’m not going to play any god-of-the-gaps-esque Gish Gallop games on every youtube video he’s in when ultimately he’s basically just another Andrew Bolt.

    • Isn’t this exactly what identity politics is – take a generalisation based on a social group and seek to generate a political divide? And the process reinforce stereotypes and ignore individual circumstances?

  2. The Labor right hated him because he wasn’t a pure markets (and lets skim on the side) man. The left hated him because he talked about responsibility and mutual obligation and wasn’t a victim. If Latham can help smash the population ponzi and gut the fake neoliberal left and neomarxist left alliance to allow a real left to rise in its place he will be a true Labor hero.

    Richo is the worst that Labor can be.

      • He is NOT a misogynist as such.
        He has railed against the toxic influence of Third Wave Feminism and Mainstream media Cultural Marxism.
        There is a BIG difference.

      • When you say “misogynist“ do you mean in the old pre-Gillard sense or the newer “someone I don’t like with a penis” sense?

      • drsmithyMEMBER

        When you cant play the ball play the man!

        Unsure if your response is referring to “mysoginistic DH” or “cultural marxism”.

    • ErmingtonPlumbingMEMBER

      Yes, the fact that he acts like a bit of a d1ckhead and bully at times is beside the point of what he is saying and standing for.
      He is speaking up more sincerely than almost any other current or former politician, thats why the ALP are going so feral against him,…he is a reminder to working class people what the ALP leadership should be speaking about.

      I hope he doesn’t go to ON and work alongsude Pauline,…this will bring him too much discredit. Unless he can take it over and run it,…he shouldn’t go anywhere near it.

      Would the Grey Beards of the SAP take him onboard let him be their leader?

      • ErmingtonPlumbingMEMBER

        Is he really Dennis?,….I mean sure he is a Prick,…but is he really a misogynist?

      • A voice of dissent against feminist neomarxism is not necessarily misogony, it’s just a voice of dissent. There should be no issue coping with it intellectually if it was flawed. The problem for the neomarxists is that it’s not flawed, it raised genuine problems in their ideology. Why should we have a problem that Latham and Arndt forced a real discussion on DV funding (which is massive) and brought the statistics into the discussion?

      • Despite being a balanced and honest voice of reason, Bettina Arndt is all but ignored by the majority of the Australian mainstream media. She just doesn’t fit in with their lies and crypto-marxist agenda.

      • I just listened to that story and it’s really hard to see how that is not a rational and reasonable view. I can appreciate that some people might not agree, but its well based, articulate and sensible. Latham is not abusing Batty or shouting at her, he is just saying he believes she is wrong. That story has no evidence of misogyny.

      • In fact if you can look past the DV machine, you will see the statistics are highly contested at academic levels and cover over some other serious flaws with the system. From Arndt:

        “A survey of NSW magistrates found 90 per cent agreed that AVOs were being used as a divorce tactic. Research by family law pro- fessor Patrick Parkinson and col- leagues from the University of Sydney revealed that lawyers were suggesting that clients obtain AVOs, explaining to them that verbal and emotional abuse were enough to do the trick”

      • Gotta laugh at that recording. Poor old men, losing their jobs and self-esteem, poor diddams!

        Ask the police, the most dangerous place for a woman on a saturday night is in her home. 1.5 women pw are MURDERED by a male they know.

        Whatever field you compare women with men, they earn less, don’t get promoted as much. This is from the factory level all the way to the top end of town.

        The guy’s a DH, pure and simple.

      • The article from Arndt is well worth reading and deconstructs much of the statistics and the methodologies. I have actually searched for a statistical and evidenced based rebuttal of this piece because it contrasts so strikingly with the accepted msm story, but have only found articles that attack Arndt or talk in generalisations.

      • And actually, it’s pretty dangerous for men too, about 40x more dangerous.

        “Why are we not pouring two billion dollars into a problem which sees over 2000 men killing themselves each year?* That’s 44 men a week! Where are the hundreds of millions of dollars in funding being directed into prevention of male suicide -particularly in the most vulnerable age categories and in our rural communities? Approximately fifty women being killed in family violence incidents a year is considered to be an epidemic. I don’t know what word we should use to describe the deaths of more than 2000 men annually. ”

      • drsmithyMEMBER

        Would the Grey Beards of the SAP take him onboard let him be their leader?

        It’s clear from their policies that the grey beards of SAP consider things like racism and sexism to not only be real, but be bad, so it’s unlikely they’d care much for Latham.

        It amuses me no end some people here are so pro-SAP when their only significant policy difference from the Greens is a hard number on immigration.

      • “people here are so pro-SAP when their only significant policy difference from the Greens is a hard number on immigration.”

        Just not true they come from a very different ideological base. The Greys are not evidence based on many issues, they are ideological. The Greys are the neomarxist left they import all this ideology and then tweak it to make it palatable with the environment subjugated in this morass. SAP purports to be an evidenced based party with a primarily environmental objective. They are very different beasts, even if they end up with some similar policies. But where it matters in the environment the Greys are failing.

      • ErmingtonPlumbingMEMBER

        The Greens Smug disregard and contempt for working class people,…esp those that Breed have them already flaming out.
        They’ve got quite a misanthropic streak to,…a young green voting fellow I know, from the inner city, was talking to me other day at the club, about that young Thai Soccer team,…whether or not they’d get them out alive.
        I said something along the lines, that thay should bring in a $hit load of heavy machinery and excavate a massive trench through the jungle to drain the water away from the cave.
        Ive been there he says and thatd wreck the environment there!
        The stupid Fkers should never have gone in there in the first place,….they should just let them die.
        I laughed and said ya can’t do that,….to which he dug his heals in and said why not, their is to many people on the planet anyway!
        Later on (we are both a bit pissed) he becomes enraged when I say there is no “Gay comunity”,…just “the Comunity” of which we all belong,…including Gay people.
        He became more angry when I pointed out, laughing at the fact he was so insulted at my comment,…but saw nothing wrong in his stating they should have left that bunch of boys to die.
        He just couldn’t see the hypocrisy of his outrage.
        Thinks of himself as very woke fellow im sure.
        I reckon the Greens will flame themselves out, in a roaring fire of
        self flagellation and intersectional indignation.

        Note to Smithy,…you guys don’t own the non prejudice egalitarian high ground, anyone who stands there owns it to,…whether or not they agree with your postmodernist BS Narrative.

      • drsmithyMEMBER

        Just not true they come from a very different ideological base.

        And how does this manifest in their policies ?

      • drsmithyMEMBER

        Where are the hundreds of millions of dollars in funding being directed into prevention of male suicide -particularly in the most vulnerable age categories and in our rural communities? Approximately fifty women being killed in family violence incidents a year is considered to be an epidemic.

        Well, probably the biggest problem is most men’s attitudes towards the kinds of things that drive suicide are ‘suck it up, buttercup’.

        Whereas most people think a bloke putting his spouse in hospital with a broken jaw is bad. Well, except for the occasional MRA who doesn’t see a huge difference in principle between that and a woman screaming at her other half cuz (since they’re both cases of “domestic violence”).

      • ErmingtonPlumbingMEMBER

        “Well, probably the biggest problem is most men’s attitudes towards the kinds of things that drive suicide are ‘suck it up, buttercup’.”

        What a “Woke” guy you are Smithy.
        All men are Guilty and deserve to die,…lol
        Im sure your looking forward to some of these intersectional shenanigans coming to our Universities,…Fallists!

        Whats your position on the “Decolonization of Science” Smithy?

      • Imagine if it was said that women were beat up because they have a pretty poor attitude of suck it up instead of just leaving or taking control?

        The MRA comment is just a simplistic charactiture that is unsubstantiated nasty and inconsistent with the facts raised in the Arndt article.

      • drsmithyMEMBER

        All men are Guilty and deserve to die,…lol

        I imagine you’ll have as much trouble as Mr Llyonhelm – presumably one of your heroes, now – coming up with a quote of anything I’ve said even vaguely resembling that.

        Whats your position on the “Decolonization of Science” Smithy?

        Never even heard the term until today. Presumably it’s going to be an example of some fundamentally quite reasonable principle that the right has taken – in it’s usual inability to grasp nuance and context – to some absurd extreme thus destroying any possibility of rational discussion on the topic at all.

      • ErmingtonPlumbingMEMBER

        Ouch,….sting Smithy! (Genuine hearty laugh at that one)
        That bloke is a dick! and showed very poor form,…but SHY going on about “Slut Shaming” afterward on the radio was a lot of $hite.
        Just Another day of our MPs Not addressing any of the issues important to working class men and women, Black and White, homo, hetro or bi

      • drsmithyMEMBER

        Imagine if it was said that women were beat up because they have a pretty poor attitude of suck it up instead of just leaving or taking control?

        Plenty of people will tell women who are victims of domestic violence it’s their fault, either initially for getting into a relationship with the wrong person, or ongoing for not leaving that person. I have been told that by multiple commenters on MB in the past.

        Men’s over-representation in suicide stats gets relatively little attention because men generally aren’t prepared to admit there are underlying problems driving it (to themselves or others). Indeed, attempts to try and pre-emptively address situations that lead up to depression and suicide are frequently met with scepticism, if not outright derision.

        There is no conspiracy against men about suicide. There is a woeful shortage of men prepared to admit the problem even exists, let alone take action against it, consequently it has a lower public profile.

        The MRA comment is just a simplistic charactiture that is unsubstantiated nasty and inconsistent with the facts raised in the Arndt article.

        No, it’s an example of an actual comment that was made to me here on MB. As are the ones about women being to blame for domestic violence for entering a relationship with a “bad man” and being to blame for ongoing incidents because they didn’t leave said “bad man”.

        Last time I looked at Arndt’s writing, she was glossing over the very different outcomes of “domestic violence” vis-a-vis male-on-female vs female-on-male by focusing almost entirely on the instigation side. Eg: an “equivalent” incident of “striking” might mean a man going to bed alone with a sore cheek vs a women going to the emergency room with a broken jaw and some missing teeth.

        The fact remains that female deaths dramatically outnumber male deaths when it comes to domestic violence, and trying to brush that aside quoting stats like 23% vs 22% male vs female instigated is grossly disingenuous, to put it mildly.

        These significantly different outcomes are one of the reasons for the significantly different public profiles.

      • drsmithyMEMBER

        Just Another day of our MPs Not addressing any of the issues important to working class men and women, Black and White, homo, hetro or bi

        Just another false dilemma fallacy.

        I’d imagine a work colleague with a history of bullying trying to intimidate and shame them into silence – based on a lie – because of their sex lives is something many working class men and women might be worried about.

        No different to trying to do it based on their race, religion, accent, postcode, etc, etc.

        Got a daughter, Ermo ? Would you be comfortable with some little twerp at school “slut shaming” her into silence (pick some other form of bullying if you want, I’m sure you’ve dealt with enough toffs to have a few to pick from that are class related) in the classroom so she didn’t show him up as a dickhead ? Why is that behaviour any more acceptable in the workplace ?

        Apropo to the discussion above, this sort of harassment and bullying is exactly the sort of thing that leads to depression and suicide. Unless you’re one of those “suck it up, buttercup” Libertarians who thinks the only harm is physical harm, of course.

      • ErmingtonPlumbingMEMBER

        How is saying “if you hate men so much dont root them”,….”Slut Shaming”?
        I agree It was offencive and a Dumb as dog$hit thing to say,…but please explain how it is “Slut Shaming”?
        WTF does that even mean!

      • EP,
        I BEG you to watch last nights episode of “You Can’t Ask That” on the ABC. They’re all rape victims answering questions on their experience.

  3. I agree. Mark (if he can channel his temper somewhere productive) could really transform ON into something.

    As for Labor, the labor of the past is gone, dead.

  4. Ok, you’ve jumped the shark now. I don’t why, but that’s it. Latham is only relevant to the fevered fantasies of people who touch themselves while Sky News is playing. Sad.

    Maybe Rowan Dean next? Or maybe that other bozo? Hey, if they can get all the 6 thousand or so viewers who watch their show to vote for them, they may just scrape by for a 4th senate spot. So. Much. Winning!!!!!

    • The fact that Canavan and Plibs formed a QnA alliance to spin the population ponzi shows they sense the mood. Can the mood get traction? Who knows but it’s there, Sydney and Melb are seething and Brisbane has glimpsed its future.

      • False binary? Just lol. Latham is a political class insider talking head. He isn’t an everyman, and he isn’t electable bar as a mistake of the preferential senate system. This is all just beltway nonsense from people who like the smell of their own farts. Its like those signs that Palmer has put up all over the place: “Make Australia Great”…..for some reason he has left out the “Again” from most of them….probably because its false advertising. This is a conservative country that leans from the centre right towards the centre left. It has been since Federation. We like our small L social policies, socialised services, endless rules and traffic signs, but we don’t like the unemployed and the lace curtains will be twitching if you look too different. There is no real place politically for people like Latham or Leyonhjelm, they are aberrations that pop from time to time when the majors are shifting. This will never be America.

      • @Haroldus Sweetie, If I wanted to stalk you I’d hang out the front of the Camperdown Oval toilets between 10pm and Midnight .

    • haroldusMEMBER

      people who touch themselves while Sky News is playing

      Well, I like a challenge.

  5. I don’t think he has the character or temperament for leadership. You’d be inviting a narcissistic dilletante into high office. That hasn’t worked out well elsewhere in the world.

      • Although i reckon we would all be tested dealing with the apparatchiks and hollow-men that the Party system throws up.

  6. Latham talks to Old Labor in a way the pathetic Blair imitators and insipid Blair babes never could. He is a threat because he combines articulation with a blokishness that no front line Labor bloke can manage. They go into the pub at election time, pose with a beer, so fake and couldn’t tell you which was shorter 6 to 4 or 11 to 8. They’re a joke.

    • This is true and one reason Labor is probably terrified of Mark taking over one nation. He will speak to their traditional voters in a way they no longer do/can.

      • He also knows 11 to 8 is shorter than 6 to 4, unlike Bill who couldnt even tell you the difference between the 1200m journey at Flemington compared to the 1200m journey at Randwick.

  7. As his past has shown, he’ll never lead a major party (to election success) because he’s too “unsafe” for many Australians. Mainly because he speaks his mind and doesn’t baffle on with PC bullshit. “Conga line of suck holes” is a classic example. (BTW Keating would never get away with his venomous tongue these days, but has come up with some incisive verbal insults)

    He would definitely attract votes because his values are actually more in align with both “true” Labor AND Liberal values. The major parties are total sellouts that stand for power for the sake of power. They have destroyed Australia and sold the remains to the CCP.

    I hope he throws his hat into the ring. If anything it will bring important topics to the surface so that they cannot be hidden by the Laboral stench and their slipstream hanger-on parties.

    He will be attacked because he is feared.

    • ” because he’s too “unsafe” for many Australians. Mainly because he speaks his mind and doesn’t baffle on with PC bullshit.”

      Bullshit, people would love someone like that, cutting through the political crap, they just don’t want a bar of his personality or his thinking.

      PK would romp it in if he was in politics again.

      • Aussies opted for conman Howard because he’d furrow his eyebrows and lull the populous into a state of complacency. Kevin07 was a safer bet so they ditched Howard even though it was boom times.

        Some people like the “no bullshit” approach, but that’s not going to win the critical mass. The good thing in this case is Latham is nowhere near becoming PM so will attract enough votes to get the major parties worried without having to compromise his approach.

      • That’s not really correct. You are actually just rolling out the Liberal Party’s adverts for Latham again (remember the old L(learner)atham) – makes me wonder if you are in fact just a Labor hack.

        And as the world starts to get it, it’s possible the expensive suit and clock loving, failed businessman, but rich-set wanna-be, PK would be exposed as the hopeless market enamoured neoliberal fake left personality cult that history may ultimately remember him as.

      • “Honest John” Howard …. quite possibly the biggest political scam pulled on the Australian public in living memory.

      • aj, voted Labor ’til my late 20s ( ’til late 80s), then voted Lib once or twice (Howard, actually thought he’d make a good PM, but alas, a disappointment) and haven’t voted either since.

        It’s hard to know what Keating would have done if he’d still been in power over JH’s time.

    • Nope, those days are gone. People are angry now in a way they weren’t in 2005. The majors are also no longer a safe pair of hands.

      I think Mark could do very very very well if he can keep his temper in check.

      • “Honest John” Howard …. quite possibly the biggest political scam pulled on the Australian public in living memory………………..he originally got his nickname Honest John following the Fraser Govts 1977 election victory which was based on tax cuts which were cancelled the next year. Howard was then Treasurer having replaced Sir Philip Lynch who resigned from his hospital bed mid election campaign in 1977 following revelations in the Victorian land deals scandal. The name Honest John was a tongue in cheek description of John Howard. Ironically that was forgotten and idiots thought Honest John Howard meant he was honest. Much similar to the phrase the lucky country coined by Donald Horne, people thought he meant Australia was a lucky place when in fact he was pointing out the arrogant complacency that afflicted the place and if such attitudes kept up the “luck” would run out. Fast forward to 2018 and here we are

  8. I like how being in multiple parties is a bad thing. Yet if you worked for several fortune 500 companies that’s a good thing. Being rusted on to liberal or Labor your whole life is a bad thing. I don’t get this alignment with 1 party thing. I see Labor do dumb thing I won’t vote for them I’ll find minor parties I agree with. The whole team red / team blue thing is stupid. The country would be better if more minor parties have power.

    • +1.

      Right now it’s a choice between the Globalist Liberals, Socialist Labor and Communist Greens.

      Go long lampposts.

      • Good point Gavin, Churchill was in parliament for the Liberals before he changed to the Conservatives, doesnt seem to have tarnished his reputation for most people

    • Reusa will have you know that having multiple relations is a good thing – even though your d!ck may fall off if you make it past 40. Being stuck with one watering hole is bad’mkay? And, hey, while you’re at it, why look only at holes?

    • ErmingtonPlumbingMEMBER

      A big part of the indoctrination/propaganda model involves Sports,…ya gotta go for your team!,…even if they are a pack of C#nts!
      It help to create an irrational submissiveness to Power.

      • drsmithyMEMBER

        Hang on a sec. Don’t I remember you having a go at people who weren’t prepared to slap on some ridiculous outfits and mindlessly support their preferred sporting team because that’s part of being a true-blue working class Aussie ?

      • ErmingtonPlumbingMEMBER

        Ha Ha Ha you wouldn’t have heard that from me Smithy,…other than being forced by my father to support St George through out the70s and early 80s,…I have never followed professional sports in my entire adult life.
        I just cant bring my self to care who wins,…unless of cource im watching my boy or girl in their soccer or net ball.
        BTW I know many Working Class people who dont care much for Professional sports,…making some unfair assumptions there Smithy?

  9. FiftiesFibroShack

    No matter what party Latham joins he’s going to have a falling out with them.

    Latham just completely fails the character test. Fomenting white grievance and victimhood with his inane comments about “anti-white racism” is a symptom of that dud character. I wouldn’t vote for him to run meat tray raffle at my local. And I’m surely not the only one person amused by one of the most prominent faces of Australian white grievance politics bemoaning identity politics, either.

    At least the inevitable blow-up between Latham and member(s) or whichever party he joins will be popcorn worthy.

    • ErmingtonPlumbingMEMBER

      When mentioning to my 5 year old daughter, that her maternal great grandfather was born in England,…she responded very assertively,…”I HATE England people”
      Why? I asked,…”you’ve got English blood in you”, I say
      “No I haven’t!” She defensively replys, tears starting to well up in her eyes.
      She’d got this from school and it really gave me the shits,…here is a child being taught white guilt/self loathing about her ethnicity and history before she can even locate Australia or England on a Globe of the world,…before she has any true sence of her history.

      You have no Idea what you are commenting about Fibro.

      • Got to love how nasty self righteous lefties get the moment you point out the flaws in their beliefs.

      • The failure to understand you are an ideologue is the key indicator you are an ideologue. Abuse rather than debate is the norm.

    • Really? It is still possible to discuss racism without neo-marxist identity politics. Claiming Latham as one of the neo-marxists because he pushes back against identity politics is a stretch. There may be better ways to push back if you are dealing with the university set or writing a piece for Quadrant but that’s not the group whose opinions he is mostly listening to.

      Personally i would rather a market sceptical liberal with a belief in the political process (like Latham) fill the gap and guide the discussion than some right wing nutter with a genuine racist agenda. If the political system doesn’t listen to people they will find someone that does.

      • FiftiesFibroShack

        “Personally i would rather a market sceptical liberal with a belief in the political process (like Latham) fill the gap and guide the discussion than some right wing nutter with a genuine racist agenda.”

        On that we agree. Although you’ve lost me on this neo-marxist stuff. Those clowns don’t even make up 1% of the uni crowd and somehow they’re constantly being dragged into the discussion. I suspect this is because they’re a useful group to get people’s outrage running hot.

        This grievance politics nonsense is a cancer as bad as any of the other identity politics issues. In many respects it’s more toxic.

      • That’s an arbitrary statistic that you have clearly just made up. These are significant power bases, rooted in the university system, that have an undercurrent of neomarxist (equality of outcome) ideology. And as can be seen from the big funding machines that support pet areas they are very very powerful. They have a place in the intellectual landscape for sure, but they are also not sacrosanct, they deserve scrutiny and intellectual rigour. To suggest that counter ideologies/ideas that push back against these are flawed merely because they push back is dangerous territory.

      • ErmingtonPlumbingMEMBER

        “Those clowns don’t even make up 1% of the uni crowd and somehow they’re constantly being dragged into the discussion”.

        They are paid to advise the government and the coporate sector, and are pushing through their own kind of authoritarian agenda.
        They are beoming tools of the establishment, inspite of their claims to be fighting it.

        From ajs/bustle link on, 8 intersectional feminists you need to know,

        Laci Green,
        2. Laci Green
        “If you haven’t already heard of her, you should head over to Sex Plus and check out sex education activist, blogger, YouTube sensation, public speaker, and host of MTV’s Braless , Laci Green. Although she is white, she’s an outspoken, intersectional feminist who knows that feminism needs to include everyone.

        As it states in her bio, Green has “worked with more than 100 universities, conferences, military groups, and government offices on sexual health and sexual violence prevention efforts” — and this is in addition to producing videos for Planned Parenthood.”

      • FiftiesFibroShack

        “That’s an arbitrary statistic that you have clearly just made up”

        It’s based on my experience, which is significant.

        “These are significant power bases, rooted in the university system, that have an undercurrent of neomarxist (equality of outcome) ideology.”

        People supporting equality of outcome are very rare; it’s impossible to achieve. People arguing for policy to lessen inequality have a significant following and backing – equality of outcome does not. That’s a lie being pushed by shills that don’t want to address any of the imbalances at all.

        “And as can be seen from the big funding machines that support pet areas they are very very powerful.”

        Big funding machines that support equality of outcome? You’ll have to give me a couple of examples.

        “They have a place in the intellectual landscape for sure, but they are also not sacrosanct, they deserve scrutiny and intellectual rigour.”

        Sure, and they get it. If only you applied the same scrutiny to your preferred shills.

        “To suggest that counter ideologies/ideas that push back against these are flawed merely because they push back is dangerous territory.”

        I did no such thing. What Latham et al. are spruiking is flawed because it’s pushing back against a neo-marxist strawman and is exploiting ignorance and fragility.

      • ErmingtonPlumbingMEMBER

        Any opinion on Evergreen College and the sacking of Bret Weinstein,…Fibro?

      • Appreciate that it may be your experience, but it is not mine. Which still leaves a rubbery statistic. “Policies that lessen inequality”, well that’s the heart of the matter isn’t it. It’s the belief that anything that theoretically generates equality of outcome is worth pursuing and that any inequality of outcome is a systemic problem. The thing here is that Latham is not being argued against, he’s being shouted down like a heretic, in return he has not sought to shout down the competing ideology.

        To say alternative views are just ‘ignorance and fragility’ is to really embrace the neomarxist left. You can’t argue against that, it’s ideological.

      • FiftiesFibroShack

        “Any opinion on Evergreen College and the sacking of Bret Weinstein,…Fibro?”

        150 students, the largest estimate I’ve seen out of a student population of around 4000, turned up and hurled slurs at Weinstein. Evergreen management didn’t discipline the students or back Weinstein. Weinstein resigned.

        I guess that’s what happens when you financialise education and all the students become walking talking cheques for tens of thousands a year.

        Are you done making a fool of yourself?

      • ErmingtonPlumbingMEMBER

        Evergreens enrollments have dropped dramaticly and faculty has had to be layed of as a result…all a product of postmodernist identity politics running amok in that university.

        As for personal anecdotes, i See this ideology being pushed on my children through all media and the education they are required to consume.
        This rot may not “feel” real for you, but I see and hear it it all the time.

      • drsmithyMEMBER

        I don’t think I’ve ever met anyone in my life who genuinely believes in creating “equality of outcome”.

        I’ve met some people who believe that creating equality of opportunity will lead to equality of outcome, but that’s an entirely different kettle of fish, and even they were in a minority.

        There seems to be difficulty understanding that exactly the same principles that will lead you to conclude that economic inequality is bad will also lead you to believe other forms of inequality are bad as well.

        You keep throwing around this term “neomarxism”. I do not think it means what you think it means. Is the old “cultural marxism” label starting to peel a bit too much at the corners so you need something that’ll stick better ?

      • By treating all differences as social hierarchical constructs that is what is going on, even if the neomarxist is convincing themselves of equality of opportunity not outcome. It is neomarxist in character. This may actually be a modern Petersonism, and has taken root in that space.

  10. Relevant StakeholderMEMBER

    To all the intersectional feminists posting above, what kpi are you using for monitoring white privilege? When will you be satisfied?

      • If you couldn’t be arsed reading that link, here is an extract which should tell you all you need to know about intersectional feminism:

        “It’s hard to believe that a 13 year old can understand, and perfectly express, what intersectional feminism means better than most adults would be able to, but Rowan Blanchard did just that in her recent essay on the topic of intersectional feminism.”

      • ErmingtonPlumbingMEMBER

        I thought the title of the article following the, “8-awesome-intersectional-feminists-you-need-to-follow” article exemplified the intellectual and journalistic quality of “Bustle”.

        “4 July 2018 New Moon Astrology Predictions That Will Help All Zodiac Signs Make The Most Of This Lunar Event

        July’s astrological line up is more packed than Coachella’s main stage. First of all, it’s eclipse season. Then, six planets are scheduled to be retrograde over the course of the summer, five of which will happen concurrently in July. Now, it seems we can also count on the moon to add its lunar layer to July’s astrological ~vibe~. July new moon astrology predictions get swept up in the planetary motions. But don’t worry, this dizzying month won’t leave you feeling like you just stepped off an intense roller coaster. There’s a lot of reflection to look forward to.”

      • Hey you’re right EP, i couldn’t see it at first because of disabled javascript. THE MORE YOU KNOW!

    • Intersectional feminists should be treated like Lepers…..except without the sympathy and understanding.

  11. Jumping jack flash

    Mark would be viable if he got over his anger issues.
    If the hype is to be believed, he seems to be able to see things for what they are and not be influenced by vested interests, including his own.
    Pretty much an ideal polly, but, yeah, pretty angry.

    Take into consideration the fact that he isn’t actually in a position of power therefore he can say any sensible and measured thing he likes without being held too accountable.

    Once you sit in the actual hotseat of power, it seems to have the effect of slicing off your cajones and impairing your ability to get absolutely anything done that has any chance of making an actual difference to anything significant.

    But don’t forget almost everything that could have a direct effect on the everyday experience of ordinary Australians is outside the government’s control since the late 90’s, when most of it was sold off.

  12. The last thing Australia needs is a Trump. Immigration has been good for this country and with the currebt economic headwinds it is time to increase it and encourage more investment from North East Asia.

    • Lol. Clearly massive inequality and hyper-pollution are really what this country needs right now. The final hammer blow of crush-loading to our institutions of schools and hospitals, roads and infrastructure and environment that have been boned by neoliberalism should see us really achieve great things over the coming decades.

      • aj
        What inequality, what crush load on infrastructure and services? This is a myth thrown up here on this site, in reality our kindergartens, schools, roads, hospitals have low to moderate loads. If it weren’t for immigration and population uplift this place would be a barren wasteland populated by degenerate blue singlet wearing morons.

      • Have you actually driven on a road (in Sydney it doesn’t even have to be peak hour) or been to an emergency department in the last 5 years? Have you even bothered to notice the demountable crap that litters our schools. Can you point to new pools or sporting infrastructure that match that massive densification of our suburbs. Can you refute the disasterous travel time that now plagues our major cities. Can you refute the increased pollution and loss of social/environmental amenity that now impacts our waterways and suburbs.

        This has blog has smashed your high growth bullish*t with facts and the open border ideologues still march on: “inequality and poverty for all”

      • We can also probably guess that our hypothetical Fred if he lives in the city doesn’t interact with the environment in any meaningful way. He doesn’t like trail riding or running, ocean swimming or sailing. Typically a Fred will be inner city childless and ambitious (or child gone property holder), with links to the development/FIRE industry or the neomarxist skimming industry.

        If our hypothetical Fred lives in the country he has no concept of life in the city, thinks people and migrants should go to go to his tiny town so it can grow, even though there is absolutely no work, and the tiny amount of productive work that is there is currently being outsourced/automated or paid at a rate that means even regional home ownership is prohibitively expensive.

        How’d i go?

      • Sound like an attempt to publicly shame me and put me in my place.
        You’ve really hurt my feelings.

  13. Great article on Mark Latham from 2002:

    He studied hard and was dux of his high school

    Since Latham’s father died when he was 20, Whitlam acted as a father figure. “I couldn’t have done The Whitlam Government if he hadn’t helped me on it,” Whitlam says. “He was a very accurate researcher. I take great pride in the part I’ve played in his public and political development.”

    “Gough said, `He’s like a son to me’.”


    Latham said it was outrageous for Mr Abbott to attack him when the minister had described the unemployed as job-snobs

  14. Latham has posted the following up on Facebook under his Mark Latham’s Outsiders group.


    The man they call ‘Richo’ has spent a lifetime associating with criminals: Danny Casey, Balmain Welding, Tom Domican, Eddie Obeid, Offset Alpine (the Swiss Bank Accounts) and Ron Medich.
    He took money from an outfit (Balmain Welding) that was funded from the drug trade (see below).
    Yet News Corp has decided to employ Richardson twice: at The Australian newspaper and Sky News.
    That tells you everything you need to know about the Mainstream Media: moralising about others while dropping their own standards into the gutter.
    Incredibly, Richardson is also still influential inside the ALP: as Anthony Albanese’s leadership campaign director (to knife Shorten) and as a mentor to Sam Dastyari and Mungo Murnain (the current NSW ALP General Secretary). He’s passing on the lessons he learned as Eddie Obeid’s business partner and Ron Medich’s lobbyist – another sign of Labor’s ethical collapse.

    • Latham is so right about that grub. That he is even still stalking the corridors shows how corrupt the NSW right is.

    • drsmithyMEMBER

      I’ve never been able to decide if Latham, a man of the political establishment for basically his whole adult life, largely repeating Murdoch press chapter and verse whilst hosting a string of mainstream talking heads, calling his show “Outsiders” was masterful irony, staggering ignorance, or deep paranoia.

      • It stems from the fact that he was an outsider. Not part of the right, not part of the left. He had views that stretched outside the orthodoxy even then. He wasn’t perfect but he was smart enough to know the labor right market crowd had nothing to do with helping the working class.

  15. ErmingtonPlumbingMEMBER

    Mark sure does get the Comments numbers up,… 139 @ 12:52am.
    That suggests a lot of people want to hear what he has got to Say,…and/or a lot of people dont want to hear him say anything at all and come hear to try and shut him down.
    Posts on our actual and current MPs rarely get this number of Comments,…whats going on People?

      • ErmingtonPlumbingMEMBER

        I got plenty of criticism of the bloke,…my comment was meant to speak to the oddly high number of comments Marks rants can get here,…thats all brother.

    • It’s a good question EP. I wonder if it’s because Latham sits on a genuine fracture point in the ideologies. The ideology of treating social hierarchies as a construct that need to be (and can be) recast in a utopian vision of society (neomarxist postmodernism if you want to give it a pop-term). Theses ideologies have jumped out of the intellectual set and are now being used as power grabs across a range of social institutions. People don’t know what to make of this, and because the language of the neomarxist is so deliberately obscure and complex it’s hard to make sense of it, other than a gut feel that it’s not good, it’s eerily like the language of Mao and Stalin.

      This is where the staggering rise of Peterson comes in. Much to the dismay of the neomarxists he has simplified and deconstructed the arcane language to show that well yes you might very much want to be concerned by these people, this is clever language that hides some some flawed ideological views. The answer from most of those that have absorbed this neomarxist ideology is that it is only a fringe on the far left, but this isn’t really true the tentacles of the ideology have wound through the left in different ways. You can see how any attempt to have a rational discussion on certain topics is impossible.

      • drsmithyMEMBER

        Much to the dismay of the neomarxists he has simplified and deconstructed the arcane language to show that well yes you might very much want to be concerned by these people, this is clever language that hides some some flawed ideological views.

        Now there’s some weapons-grade irony.

      • Weapons grade irony hey? What does that even mean? This is a clash of ideology. If you believe that the hierarchical structures and social norms of society are fully flexible and open to social construction to transform society to make it better to your definition of better then you are in dangerous country and are a neomarxist. Peterson et al would say you cannot get to this point on the data, you need ideology and this is where where Mao and Stalin stepped off from. The neomarxists might not like the label because it rightly links them with the theory and policies of Stalin and Mao, but that’s the ideology they need to suck it up.

      • drsmithyMEMBER

        Weapons grade irony hey? What does that even mean?

        I could have gone with “hypocrisy” but I prefer to be generous.

        It means the thing you are having a whinge about other people doing – using a bunch of obscure, complex, arcane language that’s nearly impossible to make sense of outside its virtue signallingdog whistling potential, to try and sound smart without really saying much at all – you are enthusiastically engaging in yourself.

        Hence the complete reliance on paraphrasing and regurgitating much of that Peterson video that was linked over the weekend, along with a bit of more undisguised right-wing blather about socialismmarxism to go with it.

        As for “what does that even mean”… More LOLs. Try explaining your posts above without the using of buzzwords du jour like “neomarxism” and “social hierarchy” and see if you can make it mean something.

    • If he can smash a dysfunctional Federal Parliament to pieces he’ll get a lot of votes, for good or bad! People are sick of the sleazy smarmy arseholes on all ‘sides’ lying & pretending they’re there to help anything other than themselves & their mates. Despite all the dust being kicked up, it’s becoming that simple.

  16. Haha the neomarxists have been labelled and they are squirming. I actually had a good look for articulate rebuttals of the neomarxist tag (because im not actually an ideologue) but found nothing but more arcane obtuse verbiage and outright misinformation and misvharacterisation. What was very obvious was that the primary focus of the left was to maintain intellectual superiority in their own ranks and over the great unwashed and not elucidate complex theories. The explanation of the buzz words has been done above if you don’t want to listen then I’m hardly surprised refusal to engage in a discussion and focus on abuse is quite typical of ideologues like the neomarxist left lol.

    Welcome to your new home – get some clarity or piss off. The fact is Peterson is owning the space and the left cannot string a meaningful sentence together other than glancing blows of sneering belittlement because that’s all they have. Heaven forbid the real left is given the space they need to transcend the wanky warriors and articulate a position that incorporates progressive theory with an evidence base.

    What’s not to love. Haha

    • drsmithyMEMBER

      Haha the neomarxists have been labelled and they are squirming.

      That would first require me to understand what it is I’m being accused of (other than being the boogey man).

      From what I’ve been able to gather, based on what I get criticised for saying, I’m being accused of thinking racism, sexism, and various other forms of bigotry and discrimination are bad, of having no time for powered-by-your-tears attention whores (O’Neill, Bolt, Milo) making big issues out of little (or non-) issues (usually so they don’t have to talk about big issues) and being critical of people playing the look-at-me-I’m-a-poor-white-man grievance politics, typically as a figleaf over the top of some form of bigotry (Latham, most MRAs).

      That’s not an accusation I feel the need to “squirm” under. I’m quite prepared to affirm, guilty as charged.

      If that’s not what I’m being accused of, well, sh!t, you might need to explain yourself a bit better with some “meaningful” and “clear” language, since you claim to value it so highly.

      Then again, that you think Peterson is somehow delivering “clarity” (outside of “oh noes, political correctness”) with his waffle (that easily satisfies descriptions like “arcane obtuse verbiage and outright misinformation and mischaracterisation”) while accusing others of same, suggests you’re just trolling.

  17. This is probably some of the better critique of the label “neomarxist” I have found. Whilst, as even a cursory Wikipedia search will show, the term has been appropriated out of its historical use by the academic left, the discussion here shows it’s going to be hard to un-stick.

    It’s a derogatory and simplified term for sure, but that is the point. The intention is to draw out the back door entry into Marxist ideology through postmodernism and critical theory that puts the pressure on these complex theories to simplify and distinguish themselves. The left has a problem here, if they want the high moral ground over the great unwashed they are going to have to articulate it in a way they understand.

    This analysis of the Hillary loss by the neomarxist left shows just how much trouble the left are in as they get lost in their own complexity: