Only sort of relevant - I really hate the way labor advertises. I assume it’s targeted advertising so you guys probably haven’t seen it, but I’ve been getting ads from two different groups - I can’t remember what they’re called exactly. One is something along the lines of ‘the truth about the greens’ and the other is something like ‘staying on track’ (I think that’s wrong but it’s somewhat similar.
The truth about the greens one is just an attack on the greens history re: responding to complaints about sexual assault etc.
The other one is a bit more of a typical labor ad - ‘only a labor government’ etc.
Anyway, they’re both labor ads, but they don’t say that until the very end when it says ‘authorised by the labor party’ in tiny writing for about half a second. and I reckon that’s complete bullshit. They’re clearly trying to pretend that these ads are ‘independent’ and not claiming them as labor ads - compared to the greens ads I see that are mostly coming from Samantha ratnam’s page - very clearly ads for the greens.
As well as that, I’ve seen ads from Kotex (a pads/tampons brand) about the potential introduction of free sanitary supplies in public schools - as much as they also serve as an ad for the brand, I find it really hard to believe that there isn’t some shady deal going on there.
@Vox, I knew that was bait and I still replied to it lol.
I agree with you that some of the things they’ve done are bs - as well as the ETS they opposed the desal plant, it gets electricity from fossil fuels which was a crap decision but other than that I reckon it’s going to be needed.
Definitely think that the greens are big on advertising federal issues - but having said that, in the lead up to this election, the only stuff I’ve seen (either advertised or directly from Victorian greens FB pages) has been about state issues. I suppose I also don’t really mind that - it’s not like they can be talking about things they’re currently doing given they don’t have any significant power.
I think the greens do a very good job of making things personal - I’ve seen FB ads for the labor candidate in my area but that’s it (for local candidate ads, I’ve gotten labor party ads as well). Compared to the greens that have placards everywhere and are doorknocking etc. I remember at the last federal election I saw literally two placards for the labor candidate - sure I wasn’t voting, but I was paying attention to politics then - and I barely knew the guys name. So yeah, I think that the greens get a lot of attention from young people because they’re good at connecting with people and making them feel like it’s actually a personal issue/that they’re vote actually matters.
Re: legalising euthanasia & medical marijuana, the safe injecting room - they’ve been greens policies since before labor implemented them.
Re: the other things you mentioned - I don’t think it’s really fair to compare a government that actually has the power to do that to a party that doesn’t have any significant power.
I definitely agree that labor has done some great things - but there’s so much more they haven’t done, and so much they could have done earlier. E.g. a cash for containers scheme and a ban on single use bags are still non-existent in Victoria.
Sorry if there’s tons of typos in this - silly me wrote it on my phone.
yessss take the bait!!!
On ads: I don't particularly like the personal attack ads either. They're tacky and they don't help advance the debate and contribute to a general sense of distrust in the political system. If you're attacking your opponents out of hand, you're attacking the system.
We've got them down here against Darryn Lyons, running the (admittedly) brilliant line "fake abs, fake independent, real liberal".
On the Greens: imo it's a cop out to say that they shouldn't have to think through policy because they're not going to be in power. The reality is that if they're elected to parliament, potentially with the balance of power, their policies will become a critical component of the next government. We saw that be the case when the Greens agreed to support the Labor government federally and we also saw that when the Greens formed government with Labor in Tasmania (highlighting this point, the Greens have actually been in government not just supported it...it was a coalition!).
The reality is there have been times where the Greens have made a tangible difference to policy, particularly federally. In most cases, those decisions have been foolish. As above, the ETS didn't pass the senate because the Greens used their numbers (which constituted the balance of power in the senate at the time) and voted against it. They then moved us to a straight tax under the next coalition government, which was both politically flawed (much easier to attack a tax) and, critically, projected to reduce emissions by even less than the ETS. So for all their grandstanding on climate change, they are just as culpable as the liberals in ruining climate policy in Australia because they failed to understand the politics.
Likewise, another example is when the Greens supported the campaign to allow conscientious objection to vaccines. Bob Brown, a GP no less, gave the Greens use of his office in parliament house for two weeks to an anti-vaccination lobby group, who successfully convinced the then Howard government to allow for conscientious objection. To put no finer point on it, this is morally, ethically and intellectually vacuous behaviour that cost people their lives, as conscientious objection and the campaign around it empowered parents not to vaccinate their children. In fairness to the Greens, their leadership now supports vaccination, but there are still anti-vaxx elements within the party, especially in the hard Left faction.
The short and sweet of it is that the Greens do have power when they're voted in and the way they have exercised that power has generally been to the detriment of Australia. I completely agree that their contribution to the debate has shifted policy to the Left, particularly in Victoria, and I think that that has been beneficial. I suspect the Labor government would have eventually brought about a safe injecting room, legalised medical marijuana and euthanasia on its own, but I do also suspect that the Greens probably helped to create a political environment that allowed it. On these issues the Greens have been good, but when actually charged with responsibility to make a decision in the national interest, they simply can't do it. They're too willing to play politics and would rather virtue signal than actually see good policy passed, and for that reason I couldn't ever in good conscience vote for them.
Also, any progressive who doubts that a Labor government can deliver progressive reforms should read up on the Whitlam government.
Home
Help
Search
Login
