The Nationals, like the Liberal Party, have no science policy. The best that can be said for them is that, at least, they don't have a picture of a politician on that page. Only a red dirt road, leading off into the empty wilderness...
The nearest Family First gets to a science policy is to be anti-abortion, anti-euthanasia, and anti-human cloning.
And, just to round out another group of three, there are the independents and the extremely minor parties. Such as the Climate Sceptics. The Climate Sceptics, since they are a party whose fundamental reason is a science based one, remarkably have no science policy either. Of course, given that they consider scientists are part of some alarmist communist tax-grabbing cabal, that's not surprising. EoR imagines they'd like to burn science textbooks in the street if they could.
EoR is, however, pleased to learn that they have a Senate candidate in WA. A chiropracter, no less.
Most Australians (myself included previously) don’t have the time to investigate the issues and as such we have allowed the extreme green left to control the discourse. The encouragement of critical thinking is something sadly lacking from our democracy, but it is my hope that my involvement with The Climate Sceptics will stimulate debate and critical evaluation of this issue by the people of Western Australia.
Critical thinking is something that is sadly lacking in those who deny the reality of climate change. And in those who can 'see' imaginary spinal subluxations. And in those who think the 'extreme green left' are somehow controlling the climate change issue. Eor nonetheless welcomes the chance to exercise his democratic rights, and place Mr Woods very last on his ballot paper.
And, if you think this appalling lack of vision is just about science, there's no clear policy for the Arts either.
Australian politics: finally resolving the conflict of the two cultures. By dumping them both.
There's one thing to be said for the Nationals in this election - they actually stand a chance of unseating Wilson Tuckey.
ReplyDeleteThat, if it happens, would make this election the best ever.
I see you just got a hat tip from Orac. Well done.
ReplyDeleteYou want to patronize the arts, fine by me. But please don't ask me to support the people you do. My tastes aren't your tastes, nor should mine be yours.
ReplyDelete@Alan: Wow, what a dim-witted attitude. So if everyone opts out of supporting via taxes all those cultural, science and social benefits that they disagree, what a fine world we would live in. I conclude from your response that the education system is seriously under funded, as it would appear to have failed miserably in your case. Sad.
ReplyDeleteA quote from C. P. Snow on the Two Cultures link:
ReplyDelete"Technology is […] a queer thing. It brings you gifts with one hand, and stabs you in the back with the other."
@Andy:agree. Unseating Wilson Tuckey would make my election.
ReplyDelete@Alan Kellogg:If we could each nominate exactly where our tax is spent...
I hope to be paying a damn more tax than you!
EoR will be making a donkey vote.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous and Lucy Jr.
ReplyDeleteAny art worth your time already receives plenty of support, it's just not what our betters call art.
As for social programs, any social program that acts to keep people helpless and dependent is a fraud. Welfare works best when it helps prepare people for life on their own, any other goal is controlling and oppressive.
Or are you convinced the majority of Humanity is a hopeless mess?
Lucy Jr,
ReplyDeleteOne more thing, you probably are paying more tax since I'm on disability and get a (US and California) government stipend. After what I went through to audition for disability I must strongly recommend you stick with your day job. You have more control over your life and even with taxes you make a lot more money.
If EoR doesn't mind, let me elucidate. Anonymous said,
ReplyDelete"@Alan: Wow, what a dim-witted attitude. So if everyone opts out of supporting via taxes all those cultural, science and social benefits that they disagree, what a fine world we would live in. I conclude from your response that the education system is seriously under funded, as it would appear to have failed miserably in your case. Sad."
Okay bub, when did I say a damn thing about science or social programs? I've benefited from government supported science, and I benefit from a social program.
My comment was about the arts. It is possible for art to find an audience, when it tries to. I have heard from writers who claim that writing shouldn't have to appeal to an audience, and I find them of a type with other artists who think they should be supported by a populace who find them twee and special and arrogant as all hell. There are artists out there who make a living from their art. There are painters who make a good living doing cover illustrations, and who exhibit a talent and technique superior to many a government supported paint jockey.
Your attitude tells me you bear nothing but contempt for the common man, betraying a profound ignorance of people and what they are capable of. As a writer once put it, the trouble with some people is that they confuse ignorance for stupidity. You talk like a bigot and you reason like one too.
You want to support the arts, then support the arts. Support the arts you prefer but leave me to support what I prefer. The money for patronage is out there, but it doesn't have to come from government. All the arts need to need is to start reaching out to the public, and stop acting so damn high falutin'. The arts community is nothing so special that they can only survive on the public dole. That's my say on the matter.
Now, stop attributing to me positions I have said nothing about.