Response on population
Replying to the article we wrote on immigration for GLW #824, Alex Milne writes: "Describing everyone opposed to Australia's record high immigration as an "anti-immigration bigot" does nothing to contribute to intelligent debate on the topic."
We entirely agree. That's why we were careful to distinguish between the bigots who use environmental concerns as an excuse for immigrant-bashing, and the "progressive activists and writers who are sincerely concerned about global warming" who wrongly believe that cutting immigration will protect the environment.
Milne goes on to say that most Australians oppose immigration, so for socialists to disagree "isolates the left from the majority," and hands the anti-immigration issue to right-wing organisations.
Immigration is only one of many issues on which socialists are a minority in Australia today. We deal with this not by abandoning our principles, but by working hard to win the majority to our side.
Ian Angus and Simon Butler,
By email
Climate change and our children
The growing body of evidence that our world as we know it is eroding from the consequences of industrialisation, mainly fossil fuels, is unambiguous.
Just like us, our children are preparing for the future, with all of the hopes and dreams that we once had.
Unfortunately, their future is hanging on a very fine thread right now. As the "permafrost" begins to melt, methane is being released into our atmosphere. Methane is more effective at containing radiation than carbon dioxide. The threat to the survival of humanity as we know it has never become so close as to the situation that we are in right now.
Just this week was the anniversary of 173 who died in a freak firestorm that scientists predict will return with a vengeance as Australia continues to heat up.
Copenhagen was a rare moment when every leader met to stop this. It was humankind sitting upon a double edged sword. If leaders chose to genuinely stop global warming and cut down emissions dramatically, a whole new field of technology was there waiting to carry the burdens and the complications that were barriers previously.
In many articles on Copenhagen, did writers dare to state the obvious: It failed.
It was politics that kept this argument going on for many years. It was greed that induced the propping up of paranoid groups to support the, "New World Order" conspiracy theory of government action on climate change to wedge the tension so that fossil fuel companies can keep raking it all in.
Melanie Shambat,
By email, Abridged
Change the debate
Tony Abbott's message of the Great Big New Tax is the latest symptom of the progressing deterioration of the quality of Australia's political system.
In order to sway the public with a short and simple hip pocket message, over and over again, the new opposition leader has made some initial impact largely because the general public find the entire climate debate confusing.
But he has to score elsewhere to do well in an election because the Rudd ETS is no more than a necessary, minimalist response and a possible compromise with the Greens would soon see this policy go through the Senate.
However, Abbott has said very credible and useful things about federal-state relations in recent times. That is where his strength lies for the nation and where massive support is achievable even quite quickly.
Given that he is surrounded by some shadow Ministers who seem to have great problems with economics, but do favour long overdue governance reform, redirection of principal election policy may be called for very soon.
The need for debating and improving the quality and structure of governance could in itself lift the debate well above the climate change conundrum, something that would be welcomed by the electorate at this juncture.
Replacing federation with a system of governance that effectively decentralises population away from the major cities can only be viewed as a bold reform long overdue.
Klaas Woldring,
Pearl Beach, NSW
Union Victory
What a brilliant victory this week by the Maritime Union of Australia for the workers of this country.
This is an outcome that sees a just wage and conditions increase to the workers on the ground level, reaping some reward from an industry that produces billions of dollars of profits for multinational corporations and huge salaries for their CEOs and other company heads.
The sheer hypocrisy on the part of these companies calling the MUA membership greedy is laughable. The Maritime Union should be applauded for a strategic, well organised campaign, that at all times was lawful and conducted within the framework of Fair Work Australia.
The union maintained its integrity in the face of a one-sided media and relentless legal efforts by the employer bodies to overturn decisions made by the industrial relations commission. This example shows what can be achieved when a workforce bargains together for better conditions.
M. Moss,
Fremantle
It's about more than league tables
Teachers must not get distracted in discussions in the community about the value of MySchool websites, league tables or NAPLAN tests. Instead, we need to articulate the ideology underlining this approach to education which frames it in the domain of competition and consumerism — market forces.
Gillard's neoliberal model of education shafts responsibility from the government onto schools, teachers and parents. This is an abrogation of the state's duty — to provide a well-resourced and viable public education system.
When schools are lumbered with this responsibility, unhealthy and unnecessary competition results between schools, teachers and students. Education should not be a contest, a comparison or a struggle between rival schools and communities for the best ranking in a medal tally.
The social role of education as the basis of equality and opportunity is under threat, as this model exacerbates socio-economic segregation and stigmatisation of public schools and communities.
This objective of gradual privatisation is central to this model.
Finally, the neoliberal ideal requires individualised, contract-based Work Choices-style employment agreements, not collective arrangements negotiated by a strong union that seeks to protect working conditions and rights.
A government that prioritises funding for war expenditure, tax cuts for the wealthy, private health insurance rebates and bailouts of big banks over the provision of a successful and adequately resourced public education system for all, needs to be reminded of the disdain the community held for those same policies and ideology espoused by the Coalition back in 2007.
We need to have this conversation with the community.
Noreen Navin,
Kingsgrove HS, Abridged
Censorship can't stop racism
Paddy Gibson (Write On, GLW #825) describes my opposition to Internet censorship as "bizarre and mistaken". While I respect Gibson's and Steve Hodder's work as anti-racist activists they are both completely wrong on this issue.
First, tackling racism means fighting against racial inequality (e.g. anti-racist movements like the anti-intervention campaign). Does Gibson think that somehow racist ideas can be prevented from spreading by merely making sure people don't say offensive things on the Internet?
Second, the left should be consistent advocates of democratic rights (e.g. free speech) — a position so basic for socialists that I am surprised that I have to defend it.
Support for the capitalist state reducing people's democratic rights, even if they are reactionary idiots, is a position that can only backfire on the left.
The left's arguments against the government's internet filter, which hands the government the ability to blacklist a wide range of sites in secret, will be weaker if we don't take a consistent position against online censorship.
Edmund Parker,
Sydney