Politics

Flying in the face of science is not something Turnbull or Frydenberg say they want to do. Neither, incidentally, did Abbott when he was prime minister. But now if we are to believe Abbott’s London speech, that was all a charade. He never really stopped believing the science was “crap”. We know his characterisation of the Labor government’s carbon price as a “tax” was also a confection.

As market capitalism has become monopoly capitalism – markets without competition – the potential capacity to see beyond it becomes ever greater. In a society benighted by privatisation, people can begin to see again what they had forgotten: that water, power, transport and other entities are social in nature, and should be controlled thus.

It is completely disingenuous for Turnbull to accuse Labor of not heeding warnings eight years ago on how the intense export drive could affect domestic supply and prices. Those warnings were offset by assurances from the exporters that it would not happen. Hollow assurances as it turns out. Sound familiar?

The tragedy for the nation is that Abbott is not framing his arguments in terms of ending the energy wars. Rather, he wants to inflame them. His only focus: the next election and drawing a sharp distinction between an affordable and reliable energy target against Labor’s dearer clean energy target. Forget warnings from Finkel, the Australian Energy Market Operator and others that without a long-term policy on emissions, electricity will cost more rather than less.

Look beyond academia’s well-intended fixation with linguistics and inclusivity and you’ll find huge body of historical and empirical evidence clearly demonstrates gender variance, non-binary gender identity and gender expression have been an intrinsic part of natural human diversity for millennia.

The chutzpah of Turnbull strongarming Vesey can only be explained as desperation borne of diabolical politics within the government spilling over into the public’s perceptions of division and inertia. So, unable to enact the sort of energy policy recommended by his own Finkel report, the prime minister has begun a pantomime, hoping his finger-pointing and name-calling will fool the audience into thinking he’s doing something.

In the past few years, almost a quarter of the small number of women who lead nations have either lost office because of charges of corruption or other criminal behaviour, or are fighting such accusations, or have members of their families who have been similarly accused. Could this be right? Could it possibly be true that so many female leaders are guilty of abusing their powers? Or is something else going on?

Many Liberal backbenchers are furious with the Nationals. One says Joyce’s unwillingness to forgo his ministerial salary is being put ahead of the government’s best interests. A minister says it has more to do with him not wanting to let a Liberal get their hands on the resources, water or agriculture portfolios. These Coalition tensions and jealousies aren’t far below the surface at the best of times. Turnbull fears they are about to erupt spectacularly as he confronts the need to come up with a credible energy policy.

Now the once-mighty bald eagle of American power is barely hanging onto its perch. You might think this de-soaring would provoke some quietude, or at least acknowledgement that building schools in Kabul instead of Kansas hasn’t turned out very well. Instead, Australian conservatives are doubling down, slating the yawning inequalities and teetering infrastructure in the United States to the usual suspects: Obama, regulation, taxes. These clichés have become the litany of a suicide cult.

To appeal to the Hansonites, Turnbull and his ministers are trying to out-Pauline Pauline. To get at Labor they have hit the nuclear button on political hyperbole. Both tactics reek of political desperation but after 18 consecutive bad Newspolls – the past six diabolical – you can almost understand it. None of it is designed to inspire the nation, it has only one base purpose: survival.