Hacker News Reader

Comment by crispinb | Hacker News Reader

Says something for the value of some sort of CI process. Here in Australia there are clear popular majorities for some form of loosening laws re marijuana, yet any politician who makes serious moves in that direction is crucified by the far right press. In effect, a foreigner (Rupert Murdoch) has a veto over Australian laws.

Even with a CI though, magic mushrooms would be a bridge too far here I suspect. Imagine allowing people to pick what's growing in the paddocks around them? The suburban world might end.

View on HN

Laws in Australia are already pretty loose: medical marijuana is permitted on a federal level (although in many places the legal hoops required to get a prescription are absurd) and in most states recreational use is more or less decriminalized. I agree that actual legalisation is a long way off, and as usual it looks like our Kiwi brothers will beat us to the punch:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_New_Zealand_cannabis_refe...

Well 'loose' is a matter of judgement. But as you correctly point out, medical use is ludicrously limited. Also 'more or less decriminalised' is an exaggeration, given the number of people I know with criminal records due to mere use (I live in Northern NSW). Cops turn a blind eye when it's useful for tourism (eg. Mardi Grass), but very freely arrest at other times. Of course you're pretty much OK if you wear a suit, but that's not specific to marijuana.

But however you judge that, the fact is that the majority of the population would like the laws much looser than they are, and without something like a CI process, it's not permitted.

Are territories and or cities able to independently legalize in Australia?

If the US had not been able to gradually legalize at a state level and build momentum, it seems unlikely that it would have gained such positive momentum overall nationally. Demonstrations through state experiments - showing that the world wouldn't end upon legalization - were important for swaying the fence sitters (and in helping to bury some of the more ridiculous propaganda by the anti crowd).

States yes, cities no (I think). South Australia was an early leader here, but that has been retrenched somewhat (again I think - it's not where I live).

Australian politics is inherently very 'centrist' for cultural and political-structural reasons. Australians culturally are comfortable and skittish, easy to scare. We have compulsory voting (so there's no skewing via getting-out-your-base), and a preferential count which tends to favour the two major parties. This has both positives and negatives, but it does make our politicians risk-averse, even when it comes to popular reforms like with marijuana laws. Not insuperably so (eg. Murdoch failed to stop equal marriage legislation), but change comes slowly.

Rupert Murdoch is somewhat a foreigner to you, having gained US citizenship in 1985, but he comes from Australia. He was born there. I don't know if you recognize dual citizenship, but if you do then it seems he is still Australian. His son James Murdoch is eligible to have Australian citizenship.

Their press may be a "far right press" by Australian standards, but over here they make donations to our more-left party. James Murdoch gave the legal maximum amount to Pete Buttigieg, who is hardly far right by American standards.

>>Rupert Murdoch is somewhat a foreigner to you, having gained US citizenship in 1985, but he comes from Australia.

This sounds like a very bizarre thing to focus on.

I was born in another country, and have been living in the US for 17 years, i.e. all my adult life. I am absolutely a foreigner when I visit family; I'm unfamiliar with and ignorant of cultural changes, events, news, etc. that have happened since I left.

So if I controlled most of the media outlets back home from where I currently am... does that not strike you as something that my home country's citizens can reasonably take issue with?

To be fair to @burfog there, it was me that brought the 'foreigner' thing up.

> I am absolutely a foreigner when I visit family

Yeah, isn't that odd. I'm a UK expat living in Aus & I feel the same. I'm far more at home in Australia (despite still having an English accent).

Murdoch is a special case in a way because, although dual US/Aus citizenship is a thing, he explicitly renounced Australian citizenship because it was required under US media ownership laws (IIRC) for a deal he wanted to push through. That does make his dominance of the Aus media scene stick in the craw even more, though (as I mentioned above) the whole issue does sniff a bit of a kind of xenophobia I dislike. Besides, there's plenty enough to dislike about Murdoch & his empire without needing to bring nationality into it ;)

> Rupert Murdoch is somewhat a foreigner to you,

He gave up his Australian citizenship to further his US business interests. He is widely considered to be an enemy of the nation. I regret my 'foreigner' cheap shot though. It's irrelevant, even a tad xenophobic.

> Their press may be a "far right press" by Australian standards, but over here they make donations to our more-left party.

Fox News!

The fact that Murdoch may attempt to smear his malign influence also over corporate Dems (a standard balanced corruption portfolio) is little mitigation.

> James Murdoch gave the legal maximum amount to Pete Buttigieg

Different person.

If you're going to apply the adjective "far" to Fox News, then you'll also need to apply it to the New York Times. According to Pew Research, that is more to the left than Fox is to the right.

I think "far" should be reserved for Slate, Breitbart, NPR, New Yorker, Glenn Beck Program, Daily Show, Sean Hannity Show, Colbert Report, Rush Limbaugh Show, Daily Kos, TheBlaze, Mother Jones.

ABC is near the center. Here is a chart centered on that, and you can pick others by clicking on the dots below:

https://www.journalism.org/interactives/media-polarization/o...

BTW, now that I think of it, Americans have a stronger case that a foreigner is running their news. By some measures, an Australian is running the largest news source. The change of citizenship is just a business tactic to enable that.

> Americans have a stronger case that a foreigner is running their news

We'll accept blame for his having been spawned, but he's totally yours now!

What does CI stand for in this case?

Citizen Initiative - an umbrella term for referenda, assemblies, etc. Apologies I don't think the initialism is standard & should have spelled it out.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com