At the official launch of Labor’s 2010 campaign Bob ‘the right wing patsy’ Hawke promoted as the esteemed father of modern Australian Labor, a faded image of its historical self. One could argue Hawke is the architect of processes that has seen Labor swing from a social change agenda towards reinforcing the mundane status quo of the centre-right. However, he cannot take all the credit successive Labor leaders have blindly facilitated these processes in turning a socialist force into a party of insipid lawyers, academics and right wing union stooges. Their only goal to retain political power for its own sake with no ambition to improve the lives of the most disadvantaged or address other social justice issues. Rather, the opposite seems to be the case in mounting a laundry list of middle class welfare responses to endear themselves to the aspirational voting blocs.
This may explain why it seem at the present there are no visionary political leaders, rather the opposite with the performances of Gillard and Abbott during this campaign. Even today Gillard sort to invoke Obama with her ‘Yes we will mantra’, while the mad monk shopkeeper could only offer another round of criticisms. Some commentators argued it is an attempt by Labor to make a distinct contrast between them and the Coalition, the question then is what these differences are.
- Labor – Socialist – centre-right – a mob of insipid lawyers, academics and right wing union stooges
- Liberals – liberalist – conservative – voice of business and private enterprise with a culture of shopkeepers, lawyers and doctors
- Nationals – conservative voice of regional, rural and remote Australia – whinging landowners who rarely look beyond the next harvest and complain bitterly about anything especially, how hard life is and how poor they are.
Do not look here for fire in the belly politics advocating social change.