Democracy Subverted, Betrayed
Subhead
The Canberra
Times, 19 February 2001
THERE are two things that need to be plainly said concerning the
Federal Government's treatment of the ABC.
The first is that the Prime Minister, John Howard, would abolish
the ABC tomorrow if he thought he could get away with it. Let's
not pussyfoot around. The Minister for Communications, Senator Richard
Alston, was asked last year when the Government would stop
destroying the ABC. He replied that it hadn't started.
The Government objects to a lot of the news and views that are
aired on the ABC. Of course it objects, because the ABC's general
reporting and informed commentary make the Government look bad, and
deservedly so.
The previous, Labor, Government was hardly any more tolerant,
for the same selfish reason. These people running our government
just don't believe in democracy and an informed electorate.
Howard knows that he can't just abolish the ABC without
suffering an unacceptable backlash from voters. So instead the
ABC is being turned into a commercial network. ABC managing director
Jonathan Shier is the hatchet man. The discipline of the
marketplace will soon pull the ABC into line. Then Howard won't have to
put up with independent minds with independent voices pointing
out the biggest rort of all, which is the Parliament of the
Commonwealth of Australia selling out to the big end of town.
This brings us to the second thing that needs to be said
plainly. The Australian Parliament has been captured by
ideological extremists. So have many other key Australian institutions.
There's a lot of talk about the ABC having been captured by its
staff, which is asserted to be leftist and biased. It's not the
ABC that's biased. It's the Parliament, the Government and the
commercial media that are biased. They have been captured by an
unholy alliance of secular fanaticism and greed.
The ideology that rules Australia now is variously called
economic rationalism, neoliberalism or neoclassical economics. It
is an intellectually bankrupt belief system. Its founding assumptions
are grossly violated in the real world.
It is therefore not surprising that its central prediction, of
an optimal general equilibrium, bears no resemblance whatever to
the global chaos of ever-more-gargantuan centralised corporate command
economies that bestride the present world. It uses clever
mathematics to hide its empty core, but it is pseudo-science.
Real scientists test their theories against observations of the
real world, to see if they bear any useful resemblance. That
hasn't been done seriously for over a century in neoclassical
economics, for the very good reason that you quickly find that
the theory has nothing useful to say about the real world.
As a scientist, I've seen some shonky theories in my day, but
nothing I've ever seen in real science comes close to the
shonkiness of neoclassical economics. Neoliberal adherents are true
believers. They have the truth and they will brook no other view.
To question their policies is to be accused of selfishly condemning the
poor to continued poverty, because that is what their baseless
little theory tells them.
The truth is the opposite. The truth is that there are poor
people because we allow the super-rich to twist the rules so that
most of the wealth flows to themselves. (This is not an argument
against markets, it's an argument for fairly managed markets.)
Neoliberalism has survived for a century or more, and lately
come to dominate the world, because fat cats love its message.
The message is, whatever you do in the marketplace is great, because
our antiquated little theory says that free markets always make
the world better off, so go for your lives. Kerry Packer, Rupert
Murdoch and friends say thank you very much, and go for their
lives.
One result is the Australian commercial media, the stamping
ground of those wise and unbiased commentators Alan Jones and
John Laws. Talk about staff capturing the company.
The station was so afraid of their egos and so grateful for the
money they brought in that it was afraid to ask them exactly how
much money they were pulling for themselves, with their unsavoury fare
of commercial advertising masquerading as independent commentary.
What did Laws, Jones and 2UE suffer for what, by any standard of
liberal democracy, should be regarded as a gross abuse of the
high privilege of a broadcasting licence? A rap over the knuckles. Why?
Because the Government and the Opposition have sold out to big
money, and especially to Australia's media duopolists.
Howard had the gall to say that he'd be more sympathetic to the
ABC if it balanced the views of Phillip Adams with someone on the
other side of the spectrum. It's not enough for Howard to have a
non-stop daily barrage of self-serving manipulation and
propaganda from the entire multi-billion-dollar Australian commercial
media industry, he has to have the poor, lonely, late-night voice
of Phillip Adams snuffed out.
The great sin of Phillip Adams, the ABC, the universities, the
CSIRO and so on, is that they have a brain in their heads, they
keep themselves informed, they often see through the thin haze of media
opiate drip-fed to the people, and they speak up. Look! The
Emperor has no clothes.
Australia, we are piously told, is a liberal democracy and a
free country. Well it's not. Australia is a manipulated,
subverted, betrayed democracy. The perpetrators of these outrages are
traitors. That includes most Members of Parliament, who every day
betray the trust of their positions by serving fat cats and heeding
extremists instead of guarding the interests of the people who
elected them.
That is why the people regard them with contempt. Pauline Hanson
is there to claim their protest vote.
The Howard Government is mean-spirited and intolerant, and it
has set Australia on the path that leads to fascism. By
suppressing dissent, by trampling on the interests of small farmers and
small business, by treating domestic unfortunates as cheats, and by
treating foreign unfortunates as criminals it takes the first big
steps to tyranny.
It also makes a gift to the Hansonites, whose professional
hatred would take us much further down that path.
This is an election year. If the Commonwealth of Australia were
a proper democracy, there would be an Opposition willing to call
the Government on its pathetic and disgraceful sell-out and betrayal,
and offering to restore and preserve the institutions of liberal
democracy. Can we hope for even a pale semblance of such an Opposition?