Hacker News Reader

Comment by BLKNSLVR | Hacker News Reader

In regards to parent commenters [0] link, this is the story that got a journalist's home raided by the Australian Federal Police (AFP) because she received leaked information (that turned out to be 100% correct) that the Department for Home Affairs was planning to allow the Australian Signals Directorate (ASD) to spy on Australian citizens.

Directly quoting from the linked article:

ASD powers have been a source of controversy for the government, after the AFP raided News Corp journalist Annika Smethurst’s home in June 2019 over a news report suggesting the home affairs department was seeking power for ASD to spy on Australians. Dutton had claimed the story was nonsense despite publicly confirming its substance.

The straight-up lying by one of Australia's highest ranked politicians bodes poorly, and goes hand-in-hand with Federal Police raiding a journalists home. Yet this seems to be the Government that the Australian people want.

View on HN

What the Australian government does well is control information and controversy. The government is a quiet achiever in that regard.

Australians have been comfortable for a while, and are generally disengaged from politics. Most Australians I know are more aware of American politics than their own.

American politics that they're happy to mock, whilst the broth they're wallowing in is rapidly coming to the same temperature.

Yes but it's much harder to find out about Australian politics because we all spend our time as a minority on an American web and our media just aren't doing (can't do?) a great job.

And also because journalists could go to prison for reporting on it.

Which Australian media do you follow? I'd say that Crikey covers politics as well as the best newspapers do overseas, and most countries dream of having a TV show like 4 Corners.

The media is certainly getting smaller—everywhere, not just in Australia—and important things aren't getting reported. The answer to that is pretty boring, though: pay your subscription fees already.

If I may add:

theguardian.com/au

michaelwest.com.au

theconversation.com

themonthly.com.au

All do decent analysis of policy and economics and holding government to account.

Sorry but I just loved this turn of phrase and how well it sits with the issue. Thanks.

Over here in the UK, brits are doing the same.

American politics is a horrifyingly successful reality TV show. It provides the entertainment and conflict people crave, with the intellectual standards of professional wrestling.

Unfortunately real administration is boring - and should be boring. We want to avoid crises.

I hadn't thought about it that way before but I think you're right. American politics is very dramatic. High tensions, big consequences, subterfuge, conspiracy. It's got it all.

> Most Australians I know are more aware of American politics than their own

Gosh this is so true. My sister and I are Americans living in Australia, she recently posted celebrating Kamala being named Biden's VP and got 20+ negative/derogatory DMs from aussie men in her network. I can't believe they care so much.

Meanwhile, you rarely read much about Australian politics in social media besides satire (Batoota Advocate, etc).

> this seems to be the Government that the Australian people want.

I can assure you it’s not. The problem with Republics is that “one man one vote” does not translate into the majority getting what it wants. The loudest and most well organized political forces will get their way, even ones small in number or popular support. State security services have a long history of involvement in politics and media in the Anglo-sphere.

Australia is not (yet?) a Republic

That was probably the least useful thing to criticise in the comment you replied to.

I know, I know, pedantry is fun. But I don't think the Queen makes much of a difference to Australia's problems one way or another.

True, and the recently revealed correspondence from Sir John Kerr to Buckingham Palace confirms that quite often the Crown is only obliquely involved for fear of politicising the head of state.

Indeed she did make a difference in 1975 when her representative fired no other than the Prime Minister.

Source: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1975_Australian_constitution...

Yes, every once in a while. Hence my qualification with 'much of a difference'.

sure, we also have a couple of atomic bombs only. Not much difference there either.

Thanks. I had no idea what he was talking about lol.

The problem with Republics is that “one man one vote” does not translate into the majority getting what it wants.

You can say that again, mate. -- USA

It’s one remotely 1 man 1 vote: the Greens get the same number of votes as the Nationals but have 10% of the representation in the house.

Let me know when we have a Greens deputy PM.

Well, Germany has a saner voting system, but they also have problem. (The Kiwis have a similar system to the Germans, I think.)

> The problem with Republics is that “one man one vote” does not translate into the majority getting what it wants.

This is not a bug, it's a feature. Otherwise you let the big cities stomp over the towns and countryside.

How do you draw the conclusion that the Australian people want this behaviour? As far as I can tell none us want this but once elected the politicians fail to action what the people want. Over and over again...

I think his point was that if you’re unwilling to stop something, that is politically equivalent to wanting it.

I think ssss11's point was, if no matter who you vote for they do the same dastardly things, and the political system is set up to lock out newcomers not allied with either major party, then there's no way within the system to stop something by voting.

Yeah thats right, I think in Australia your vote basically means nothing.

You are certainly correct if you vote for the center-left or center-right parties. But that is true in all western states.

Are you familiar with French politics? For all the crap Americans give them about surrendering in the world wars, the french have had the courage to sideline both their center right and center left parties and now the biggest parties are nationalist and socialist.

This is not true. Federal senators are elected on a state wide basis with the top N candidates past the post (N depending on size of the state). This can result in Senators being elected with a very small % of the overall votes.

For the lower house, we've had many years of the balance of power in the hands of a small number of independents who get an outsized voice.

Yes, if you live in an non-swing electorate, that is strongly held by the incumbent, then you could argue that your vote doesn't matter, but only because there are more people voting for something else. Isn't that how things are meant to work?

All of this is true, but it ignores the fact that the two major parties pretty much agree on many important issues (such as government monitoring of internet traffic).

Also the fact that (especially with a hung parliament which we've had for years) independents get an outsized voice is a bit of a two-edged sword. It's far more luck than anything else that determines who's in that vote-tipping seat and sometimes they demand all sorts of special-interest stuff in order to let things through.

I’d genuinely like to know how everday citizens get their government to do the rght thing. It seems everywhere around the world they just do what benefits themselves. people protest, and get hit with rubber bullets, but nothing seems to change.

I've been wondering the same thing lately. The solution isn't with protesting in the street, even if you can topple the government, you just get more tyranny from the next crowd.

Unlike the Ron Popiel rotisserie oven, politics isn’t “set and forget”. There’s no magic system where, once established, good honest people can ignore politics and have effective government.

I would suggest to vote with your feet.

Pick a government you like and move there, instead of trying to change the government in the place you happen to be born in.

Voting with your feet also changes where you pay taxes. (Unless you are American, then you need to jump through some extra hoops to make sure your mother country doesn't get your money any more.)

I'm not sure this is a good idea. Why would anyone abandon their home/nation to jump ship into a culture they know nothing about -- except for government policy? Only in the US with it's state system is what you're describing practical.

The US is far from the only federal country. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federalism#Examples

You are not only jumping to a new government policy, but the whole package changes. Including culture etc. Yes.

Many people around the world are looking to migrate. If borders were more open, many more people would migrate. About why? You could go and ask some of them. (Or as an alternative, Googling for 'why do people migrate?' gives lots of results to studies etc.)

Politicians are indeed afraid of public outrage.

But there is none (relevant) enough.

Because most people care most about stability.

This may sound like a technicality, but what I said was that this is the Government that the Australian people want. Reason being that they voted it in … again. It's not as if the current government have changed their stripes since the election before last.

Australians have become, in my view (happy to be proven wrong), very conservative because of the fact we've had it so good for so long, and therefore are a bit weak / soft and will cling to whatever excuse is presented by politicians that will appear to keep the good times rolling a bit longer, no matter how illogical the premise or how much it sacrifices a future just too far away to be scary yet.

Climate change and broadband as two divisive examples. They cost too much. Standing athwart history yelling Stop!

Giving me a choice of two or three mendacious, self-serving, incompetent cliques and then saying the one I grudgingly picked as the temporarily least appalling is what I /wanted/, is a bit of a long bow to draw.

Point soberly taken and understood through the scarring of experience. But then, what's the alternative to the cookie-cutter alternatives?

Start yet another micro political party doomed to the fringes? Even Nick Xenophon gave up after a few years.

Revolution? If you can't succeed as a political party how are you going to build a revolution? And does the ends justify the everything-in-between, along with the very high likelihood of potential failure and after-effects of such failure?

Maybe the silent majority have just done the maths already?

Never underestimate the huge authoritarian streak in Australia. The Wowsers have always been a powerful force in politics, and the average Aussie loves the smack of firm government.

Most of the problems in Aussie politics can be laid at the door of the Boomers, who vote in idiots because they don't understand the issues and are scared of change.

Is there an option to call an election void if no candidate gets enough votes? Have to rerun a special election, and maybe get a solid percent for a writein who actually has a different plan?

For any given political view espoused by members of a major political party, if you think "none of us" want it, you need to get out of your bubble.

There's a lot of voters out there who are quite okay with the government doing what they think needs to be done to ensure national security.

Yeah, ok fair call - there must be some who want this. “None” was too bold.

This is mostly true but it also comes with self deception/naivety that the people in charge won't do harm to civilians.

Given evidence to the contrary they prefer to imagine it as a lie.

So it's not correct today that they condone anything the people in charge are doing for national security they repress the existence of the things they don't condone.

>The straight-up lying by one of Australia's highest ranked politicians bodes poorly, and goes hand-in-hand with Federal Police raiding a journalists home.

As an aside, this is par for the course on our current government. They don't have policy, just lies and fearmongering.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com